<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Little to no scrapping and scant new orders should keep the MPV fleet stable for now, but things could change quickly if demand surges. </div>

Little to no scrapping and scant new orders should keep the MPV fleet stable for now, but things could change quickly if demand surges.

Feature image

<div class="phx-topic">The multipurpose and heavy-lift (MPV/HL) shipping sector is walking a fine line between stability and potential capacity shortfalls, according to experts. A modest order book and an aging MPV/HL fleet means the delicate balance of supply and demand in the breakbulk and project cargo industry is vulnerable to sudden changes in global economics, geopolitics and shipper strategies, experts said during a Journal of Commerce webcast Sept. 11. Despite a “relatively positive” outlook for cargo demand, “carriers have consistently stressed that they will not order additional ships without outside investment and/or long-term commitments from shippers,” said Susan Oatway, senior research analyst at the Journal of Commerce. There were 143 MPV/HLs on order at the end of July, equivalent to 9% of the current operating fleet, according to a Journal of Commerce analysis. The order book is dominated by heavy-lift capable vessels, with 63% of new buildings on order capable of lifting over 250 tons on a combinable lift. However, of the 80 heavy-lift vessels on order, only five are specialized deck carriers, and 13 have lift capability of more than 750 tons. At the same time, MPV demolitions have slowed “considerably” in 2025, Oatway said, with just four ships sent to the scrapyard through July, compared with 20 vessels in all of 2024. This dearth of scrapping is a primary reason for the upward revision in the Journal of Commerce’s fleet growth forecast, to 1.8% per year through 2029, although Oatway noted that growth is still only enough to replace tonnage exiting the market. Yorck Niclas Prehm, head of research at shipbroker Toepfer Transport, said demolitions have slowed because MPV ownership has become “an asset play.” There is no incentive for owners to scrap MPVs purchased during the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, until charter rates fall below operating costs for a given ship. <h3>‘Clear downward pressure’ </h3>Prehm said that given the current geopolitical climate, the “moderate” order book creates stability for both shippers and carriers. “The MPV segment is not overbuilt,” he said. Oatway said falling container freight rates and massive amounts of capacity hitting the water this year could prompt container lines to “chase even more breakbulk cargo,” while roll-on/roll-off ships could provide additional capacity for high and heavy project cargo. On the demand side, global GDP forecasts have “changed dramatically” in the last nine months, with “clear downward pressure on growth globally,” according to Peter Molloy, senior associate for breakbulk and heavy-lift at Drewry. “Although the demand spread has smoothed out, I don’t think it is something that everyone can sit back on,” Molloy told the webcast. Downward movement in MPV/HL charter rates illustrates the building pressure. The Toepfer Multipurpose Index (TMI), based on expected average rates for six- to 12-month time charters for 12,500 deadweight-ton (dwt) “F-Type” vessels, slipped 0.5%, to $12,753 per day in September, the third consecutive monthly decline. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="ea382181-08cd-4298-912f-87c79836bcf7"></dynamic-object></div>In its latest TMI report, Toepfer said optimism in the MPV/HL sector “seems to be diminishing” amid heightened volatility in trades that, until recently, had been important demand drivers. “The most significant decline was in the Far East to America trades, as the various grace periods for the implementation of US import tariffs came to an end, and with them the race to move cargoes quickly and in advance,” Toepfer said. Contact Carly Fields at <a href="mailto:carly.fields@spglobal.com">carly.fields@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

The multipurpose and heavy-lift (MPV/HL) shipping sector is walking a fine line between stability and potential capacity shortfalls, according to experts. A modest order book and an aging MPV/HL fleet means the delicate balance of supply and demand in the breakbulk and project cargo industry is vulnerable to sudden changes in global economics, geopolitics and shipper strategies, experts said during a Journal of Commerce webcast Sept. 11. Despite a “relatively positive” outlook for cargo demand, “carriers have consistently stressed that they will not order additional ships without outside investment and/or long-term commitments from shippers,” said Susan Oatway, senior research analyst at the Journal of Commerce. There were 143 MPV/HLs on order at the end of July, equivalent to 9% of the current operating fleet, according to a Journal of Commerce analysis. The order book is dominated by heavy-lift capable vessels, with 63% of new buildings on order capable of lifting over 250 tons on a combinable lift. However, of the 80 heavy-lift vessels on order, only five are specialized deck carriers, and 13 have lift capability of more than 750 tons. At the same time, MPV demolitions have slowed “considerably” in 2025, Oatway said, with just four ships sent to the scrapyard through July, compared with 20 vessels in all of 2024. This dearth of scrapping is a primary reason for the upward revision in the Journal of Commerce’s fleet growth forecast, to 1.8% per year through 2029, although Oatway noted that growth is still only enough to replace tonnage exiting the market. Yorck Niclas Prehm, head of research at shipbroker Toepfer Transport, said demolitions have slowed because MPV ownership has become “an asset play.” There is no incentive for owners to scrap MPVs purchased during the COVID-19 pandemic, for example, until charter rates fall below operating costs for a given ship. ‘Clear downward pressure’ Prehm said that given the current geopolitical climate, the “moderate” order book creates stability for both shippers and carriers. “The MPV segment is not overbuilt,” he said. Oatway said falling container freight rates and massive amounts of capacity hitting the water this year could prompt container lines to “chase even more breakbulk cargo,” while roll-on/roll-off ships could provide additional capacity for high and heavy project cargo. On the demand side, global GDP forecasts have “changed dramatically” in the last nine months, with “clear downward pressure on growth globally,” according to Peter Molloy, senior associate for breakbulk and heavy-lift at Drewry. “Although the demand spread has smoothed out, I don’t think it is something that everyone can sit back on,” Molloy told the webcast. Downward movement in MPV/HL charter rates illustrates the building pressure. The Toepfer Multipurpose Index (TMI), based on expected average rates for six- to 12-month time charters for 12,500 deadweight-ton (dwt) “F-Type” vessels, slipped 0.5%, to $12,753 per day in September, the third consecutive monthly decline. In its latest TMI report, Toepfer said optimism in the MPV/HL sector “seems to be diminishing” amid heightened volatility in trades that, until recently, had been important demand drivers. “The most significant decline was in the Far East to America trades, as the various grace periods for the implementation of US import tariffs came to an end, and with them the race to move cargoes quickly and in advance,” Toepfer said. Contact Carly Fields at carly.fields@spglobal.com .

Maritime

Breakbulk News

Breakbulk carriers

Multipurpose vessel supply-demand balance on knife edge

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Equipment manufacturers and industry associations urged the US Department of Commerce to take a measured approach to avoid unintentionally harming the domestic wind industry.</div>

Equipment manufacturers and industry associations urged the US Department of Commerce to take a measured approach to avoid unintentionally harming the domestic wind industry.

<div class="phx-topic">US wind energy shippers are voicing concerns about potential tariffs and subsequent supply chain disruptions and delays to clean energy development that could result from a Department of Commerce investigation into imports of wind turbines and their components. In <a href="https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/08/25/2025-16191/notice-of-request-for-public-comments-on-section-232-national-security-investigation-of-imports-of">public comments on the Section 232 national security investigation</a>, US equipment manufacturers and industry associations advocated for a measured approach to any potential remedies to avoid unintentionally harming the domestic industry. “If the administration decides to put additional tariffs on these wind components and parts in addition to those already being paid by the industry, the industry should be given time to adjust supply chains accordingly,” wrote Vanessa Sciarra, vice president for trade and international competitiveness at the American Clean Power Association. “[C]utting off access to affordable inputs before viable domestic or allied alternatives are available risks hurting US manufacturing efforts.” Henry Kelley, president of Blue Wind Technology, a US-based manufacturer of nacelles and other wind energy components, highlighted the dual challenge of protecting domestic industry while not stifling growth. “Wind is among the fastest-growing sectors in US energy security,” Kelley said. “Broad tariffs risk raising costs for manufacturers like Blue Wind without effectively targeting unfair trade practices.” Kelley painted a sobering picture of the current supply chain landscape, stating that “presently, there are no domestic suppliers ready to fully meet demand for many nacelle and turbine components.” He called for a “grace period” to allow US suppliers to scale up production and to prevent policy measures from “unintentionally derail[ing] clean energy progress.” Roger Martella, chief corporate officer and executive vice president of GE Vernova, emphasized the wind equipment manufacturer’s strong domestic footprint, noting that its “US supply chain consists of over 300 manufacturing and services suppliers representing over 50,000 total jobs, of which nearly 36,000 are manufacturing.” Martella also pointed to GE Vernova’s own technological innovations as a way to address cost concerns, stating that its new technology will “reduce manufacturing costs of casted components and provide a drastic financial advantage when compared to including costs of importation logistics and tariffs from China or the European Union.” Comments from the government of the People’s Republic of China, however, presented a starkly different perspective, calling the Section 232 measures a form of “bullying, unilateralism and protectionism under the pretext of national security.” The comments warned that “constraints on parts and components supply and higher turbine costs would discourage new construction and expansion of existing projects and reduce employment opportunities across the wind power sector in the United States.” Furthermore, the Chinese government argued that the US wind industry’s difficulties are rooted in internal structural issues, such as a lack of specialized installation vessels, limited port capacity and transportation pressures associated with larger turbines. “Before these internal structural issues are effectively resolved, attributing the US industry’s difficulties to imports will neither improve the resilience of the US domestic supply chain nor address the deeper challenges that the US wind power industry is facing,” it wrote. Contact Carly Fields at <a href="mailto:carly.fields@spglobal.com">carly.fields@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

US wind energy shippers are voicing concerns about potential tariffs and subsequent supply chain disruptions and delays to clean energy development that could result from a Department of Commerce investigation into imports of wind turbines and their components. In public comments on the Section 232 national security investigation , US equipment manufacturers and industry associations advocated for a measured approach to any potential remedies to avoid unintentionally harming the domestic industry. “If the administration decides to put additional tariffs on these wind components and parts in addition to those already being paid by the industry, the industry should be given time to adjust supply chains accordingly,” wrote Vanessa Sciarra, vice president for trade and international competitiveness at the American Clean Power Association. “[C]utting off access to affordable inputs before viable domestic or allied alternatives are available risks hurting US manufacturing efforts.” Henry Kelley, president of Blue Wind Technology, a US-based manufacturer of nacelles and other wind energy components, highlighted the dual challenge of protecting domestic industry while not stifling growth. “Wind is among the fastest-growing sectors in US energy security,” Kelley said. “Broad tariffs risk raising costs for manufacturers like Blue Wind without effectively targeting unfair trade practices.” Kelley painted a sobering picture of the current supply chain landscape, stating that “presently, there are no domestic suppliers ready to fully meet demand for many nacelle and turbine components.” He called for a “grace period” to allow US suppliers to scale up production and to prevent policy measures from “unintentionally derail[ing] clean energy progress.” Roger Martella, chief corporate officer and executive vice president of GE Vernova, emphasized the wind equipment manufacturer’s strong domestic footprint, noting that its “US supply chain consists of over 300 manufacturing and services suppliers representing over 50,000 total jobs, of which nearly 36,000 are manufacturing.” Martella also pointed to GE Vernova’s own technological innovations as a way to address cost concerns, stating that its new technology will “reduce manufacturing costs of casted components and provide a drastic financial advantage when compared to including costs of importation logistics and tariffs from China or the European Union.” Comments from the government of the People’s Republic of China, however, presented a starkly different perspective, calling the Section 232 measures a form of “bullying, unilateralism and protectionism under the pretext of national security.” The comments warned that “constraints on parts and components supply and higher turbine costs would discourage new construction and expansion of existing projects and reduce employment opportunities across the wind power sector in the United States.” Furthermore, the Chinese government argued that the US wind industry’s difficulties are rooted in internal structural issues, such as a lack of specialized installation vessels, limited port capacity and transportation pressures associated with larger turbines. “Before these internal structural issues are effectively resolved, attributing the US industry’s difficulties to imports will neither improve the resilience of the US domestic supply chain nor address the deeper challenges that the US wind power industry is facing,” it wrote. Contact Carly Fields at carly.fields@spglobal.com .

Supply chain

Transport, Trade and Regulation News

Project cargo

Energy projects

US wind sector warns against further increase in import tariffs

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">COFC Logistics joins a growing list of intermodal providers that see Mexico–US cross-border freight as a major growth engine going forward.</div>

COFC Logistics joins a growing list of intermodal providers that see Mexico–US cross-border freight as a major growth engine going forward.

<div class="phx-topic">COFC Logistics, a partner to hundreds of US intermodal marketing companies (IMCs), is expanding to enter cross-border intermodal service, forging a partnership with BNSF Railway and Grupo México’s Ferromex (GMXT) The Ohio-based company is a wholesaler that provides domestic containers and slots on BNSF trains, often used by IMCs to offer their shippers options to use both western US railroads. The COFC service will offer originations in Monterrey and Silao to seven US destinations in the BNSF network, but the majority of the freight will terminate in Chicago or Dallas. “We are excited to expand the reach and capacity of our industry-leading intermodal network to the IMC community, through these key additions to COFC Logistics’ service offering,” said Jon Gabriel, BNSF’s group vice president of consumer products, in a statement. For shippers that rely on non-asset IMCs, the new BNSF service offers another option for cross-border freight. Rival Union Pacific Railroad has served Mexico for decades, most recently teaming up with GMXT on the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/service-levels-to-determine-success-in-reshaped-mexico-us-intermodal-market-5192946">Falcon and Eagle Premium services</a>, but diversifying rail partners can help mitigate service disruptions. COFC, which made a similar — but unsuccessful — entry into the Mexico market more than a decade ago, believes this time will be different. “We’ve done our homework and retooled our approach in Mexico, bringing a renewed strategy and sharper execution compared with the past,” Jonathan Mulch, vice president of sales and marketing, told the Journal of Commerce. “This expansion gives us nationwide reach with our domestic product and reestablishes our presence in Mexico, a market that is growing fast but is highly competitive.” Although the long-term potential is strong — shippers moved $74.4 billion worth of freight between the US and Mexico in July, up 5.2% year over year, according to the US Bureau of Transportation Statistics — intermodal volumes on the GMXT have faltered this year. Through the first week of September, the Mexican railroad has hauled 622,151 intermodal loads, down 1.9% year over year, according to the Association of American Railroads (AAR). CPKC offers two cross-border intermodal services, the Mexico Midwest Express to Chicago and the Southeast Mexico Express to Atlanta, but demand is more difficult to gauge because the railroad does not separate Mexican and non-Mexican volumes in the data reported to AAR. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

COFC Logistics, a partner to hundreds of US intermodal marketing companies (IMCs), is expanding to enter cross-border intermodal service, forging a partnership with BNSF Railway and Grupo México’s Ferromex (GMXT) The Ohio-based company is a wholesaler that provides domestic containers and slots on BNSF trains, often used by IMCs to offer their shippers options to use both western US railroads. The COFC service will offer originations in Monterrey and Silao to seven US destinations in the BNSF network, but the majority of the freight will terminate in Chicago or Dallas. “We are excited to expand the reach and capacity of our industry-leading intermodal network to the IMC community, through these key additions to COFC Logistics’ service offering,” said Jon Gabriel, BNSF’s group vice president of consumer products, in a statement. For shippers that rely on non-asset IMCs, the new BNSF service offers another option for cross-border freight. Rival Union Pacific Railroad has served Mexico for decades, most recently teaming up with GMXT on the Falcon and Eagle Premium services , but diversifying rail partners can help mitigate service disruptions. COFC, which made a similar — but unsuccessful — entry into the Mexico market more than a decade ago, believes this time will be different. “We’ve done our homework and retooled our approach in Mexico, bringing a renewed strategy and sharper execution compared with the past,” Jonathan Mulch, vice president of sales and marketing, told the Journal of Commerce. “This expansion gives us nationwide reach with our domestic product and reestablishes our presence in Mexico, a market that is growing fast but is highly competitive.” Although the long-term potential is strong — shippers moved $74.4 billion worth of freight between the US and Mexico in July, up 5.2% year over year, according to the US Bureau of Transportation Statistics — intermodal volumes on the GMXT have faltered this year. Through the first week of September, the Mexican railroad has hauled 622,151 intermodal loads, down 1.9% year over year, according to the Association of American Railroads (AAR). CPKC offers two cross-border intermodal services, the Mexico Midwest Express to Chicago and the Southeast Mexico Express to Atlanta, but demand is more difficult to gauge because the railroad does not separate Mexican and non-Mexican volumes in the data reported to AAR. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

North-American rail

Rail News

BNSF intermodal partner returning to Mexico

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">An acceleration of growth in US less-than-truckload rates reflected still-tight capacity, while seasonal truckload pricing gains failed to boost rates above 2024 levels.</div>

An acceleration of growth in US less-than-truckload rates reflected still-tight capacity, while seasonal truckload pricing gains failed to boost rates above 2024 levels.

<div class="phx-topic">US truck pricing rose in August despite what carriers referred to as a continuing soft freight market, a sign that shippers are balancing current capacity needs and future demand. The total cost of both truckload and less-than-truckload (LTL) services to shippers increased in August from July, according to the producer price indexes (PPIs) released Wednesday by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Truckload pricing, as measured by the long-distance PPI, jumped 1.8% in August from the previous month, its biggest sequential leap since December 2024, but was still 0.2% lower than in the same month a year ago. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="d85fac8c-2297-4150-92dc-5357e780fd18"></dynamic-object></div>The long-distance LTL PPI rose 1.5% sequentially and 10.5% year over year in August. The measure of all-inclusive LTL pricing has risen 4.3% since May and 16.7% since July 2023, the last month prior to the shutdown of Yellow, then the third-largest US LTL provider. On an annualized basis, the LTL increase stood out compared with other sectors of trucking. Total for-hire truck transportation pricing rose 0.8% year over year, according to the BLS data. The solid growth in the LTL PPI belies reports that pricing is softening as freight demand declines, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/falling-us-ltl-volumes-putting-pressure-on-margins-rates-6077715">driving down shipment counts</a>. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="b8bff0bb-e602-4052-88a8-7955d25f97d2"></dynamic-object></div>“This says to me that shippers are willing to hang on to their current contracts and capacity and keep those carriers whole, at least for the moment,” said Keith Prather, managing director and partner at Armada Corporate Intelligence. “They may think they’re going to need that capacity later this year or early next year.” <h3>Cracks in the LTL armor? </h3>Since the recession of 2008–09, LTL carriers have become known for their pricing discipline, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-ltl-carriers-laying-groundwork-for-higher-pricing-in-2025-5822094">placing more emphasis on profitability</a> than market share. Some sources say that discipline is showing cracks as declining volumes raise the cost of operations for LTL carriers still trying to keep their trailers and networks full. But the PPI, which measures final “selling prices,” including surcharges reported by shippers, shows a steady upward trajectory for LTL costs, with year-over-year index growth accelerating considerably last month. “I think the increase in the LTL PPI is likely to stick, but I’m not as sure about the truckload PPI,” Prather said. The truckload PPI has risen 2.7% since April, with most of that increase in July and August. That gain may be attributable to increased shipments off the West Coast due to tariff-induced frontloading of imports, especially outbound from Southern California, and the produce season, he said. However, the truckload pricing index has been negative year over year since March after turning positive briefly from November 2024 through February. The PPI has struggled to pull out of the trough it fell into in 2023. A missing demand catalyst, such as increased consumer spending on goods, is <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/excess-truck-capacity-to-linger-through-2027-ftr-6077828">needed to tighten capacity</a> before rates can rise higher, according to FTR Transport Intelligence. Contact William B. Cassidy at <a href="mailto://bill.cassidy@spglobal.com">bill.cassidy@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

US truck pricing rose in August despite what carriers referred to as a continuing soft freight market, a sign that shippers are balancing current capacity needs and future demand. The total cost of both truckload and less-than-truckload (LTL) services to shippers increased in August from July, according to the producer price indexes (PPIs) released Wednesday by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). Truckload pricing, as measured by the long-distance PPI, jumped 1.8% in August from the previous month, its biggest sequential leap since December 2024, but was still 0.2% lower than in the same month a year ago. The long-distance LTL PPI rose 1.5% sequentially and 10.5% year over year in August. The measure of all-inclusive LTL pricing has risen 4.3% since May and 16.7% since July 2023, the last month prior to the shutdown of Yellow, then the third-largest US LTL provider. On an annualized basis, the LTL increase stood out compared with other sectors of trucking. Total for-hire truck transportation pricing rose 0.8% year over year, according to the BLS data. The solid growth in the LTL PPI belies reports that pricing is softening as freight demand declines, driving down shipment counts . “This says to me that shippers are willing to hang on to their current contracts and capacity and keep those carriers whole, at least for the moment,” said Keith Prather, managing director and partner at Armada Corporate Intelligence. “They may think they’re going to need that capacity later this year or early next year.” Cracks in the LTL armor? Since the recession of 2008–09, LTL carriers have become known for their pricing discipline, placing more emphasis on profitability than market share. Some sources say that discipline is showing cracks as declining volumes raise the cost of operations for LTL carriers still trying to keep their trailers and networks full. But the PPI, which measures final “selling prices,” including surcharges reported by shippers, shows a steady upward trajectory for LTL costs, with year-over-year index growth accelerating considerably last month. “I think the increase in the LTL PPI is likely to stick, but I’m not as sure about the truckload PPI,” Prather said. The truckload PPI has risen 2.7% since April, with most of that increase in July and August. That gain may be attributable to increased shipments off the West Coast due to tariff-induced frontloading of imports, especially outbound from Southern California, and the produce season, he said. However, the truckload pricing index has been negative year over year since March after turning positive briefly from November 2024 through February. The PPI has struggled to pull out of the trough it fell into in 2023. A missing demand catalyst, such as increased consumer spending on goods, is needed to tighten capacity before rates can rise higher, according to FTR Transport Intelligence. Contact William B. Cassidy at bill.cassidy@spglobal.com .

Trucking News

Truckload

Surface

LTL, truckload pricing rising despite soft demand

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Completing the Howard Street Tunnel and Blue Ridge Subdivision projects will allow CSX to restore service — and better compete with trucking — on two major north-south corridors in the eastern US.</div>

Completing the Howard Street Tunnel and Blue Ridge Subdivision projects will allow CSX to restore service — and better compete with trucking — on two major north-south corridors in the eastern US.

<div class="phx-topic">CSX Transportation is nearing completion of track renovation projects that will allow the railroad to “take yet another step” toward improving its operational performance, in addition to restoring service on two important intermodal corridors in the eastern US, company executives said Thursday. The first trains are expected to run through the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/csx-breaks-ground-on-baltimore-intermodal-project-5222647">Howard Street Tunnel in Baltimore</a> and the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/csx-q1-service-metrics-take-hit-amid-storm-recovery-tunnel-project-5978828">Blue Ridge Subdivision</a> on the North Carolina-Tennessee border within the next three weeks after being out of service for months. The Howard Street Tunnel has been closed since February, and service through the Blue Ridge Subdivision was suspended shortly after Hurricane Helene last fall. Sources familiar with the matter have told the Journal of Commerce CSX will hold ribbon-cutting ceremonies for the projects on Sept. 26 and Oct. 2, respectively, with regular service resuming shortly thereafter. CSX’s intermodal service faltered in the first quarter due to the two construction projects and winter weather in Georgia and the Carolinas. CSX’s Intermodal Service Z-Score, a Journal of Commerce index that benchmarks various service metrics reported to the US Surface Transportation Board (STB) against a railroad’s past performance, fell to its lowest reading since the COVID-19 pandemic. Service has since rebounded, with CSX’s current metrics exceeding historical averages dating back to 2017. “We were able to demonstrate you can actually get back to our leading industry performance, even without the projects being completed,” CSX President and CEO Joseph Hinrichs said during the Morgan Stanley Laguna Conference in Laguna Beach, California. “Once they’ve been completed, we should be able to take yet another step.” <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="d3655ff1-cc6b-48c1-ab4b-a84421338cf2"></dynamic-object></div>The reopening of the Blue Ridge Subdivision will restore faster service between the Midwest and the Southeast, eliminating detours imposed after Hurricane Helene struck Tennessee and the Carolinas nearly one year ago. The Howard Street Tunnel, built in the 1890s, previously allowed only single-stack trains and experienced drainage problems. The new, raised tunnel will be able to handle double-stack intermodal service, creating a new competitive option against trucks and rival Norfolk Southern Railway (NS). Although the tunnel will reopen later this month, bridge work still underway will delay double-stack service until next spring. Ceding the I-95 corridor to NS and the trucking industry has long been a weakness for CSX’s intermodal network. “We just don’t compete through [the I-95] corridor,” Hinrichs said, pointing specifically to shipments between Atlanta and the New York-New Jersey area. “We don’t even try. A lot of [the growth in those lanes] will be truck conversion, so we’re really excited about it.” Each year, about 25,000 domestic intermodal loads move from Atlanta to the New York-New Jersey region, according to a Journal of Commerce analysis of STB data. When Jacksonville, Fla., is included, CSX has been at a disadvantage on more than 30,000 shipments annually. The opportunity is even greater on the southbound leg. Nearly 50,000 domestic loads move each year from the New York-New Jersey region to Atlanta or Jacksonville, including significant parcel traffic from FedEx and UPS traveling in trailers and containers. CSX said the capabilities on the I-95 corridor could generate 75,000 to 125,000 additional loads per year, including intermodal and non-intermodal shipments. The company noted that customers have already begun preparing for the upgrade even though the railroad has not formally marketed any new services. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

CSX Transportation is nearing completion of track renovation projects that will allow the railroad to “take yet another step” toward improving its operational performance, in addition to restoring service on two important intermodal corridors in the eastern US, company executives said Thursday. The first trains are expected to run through the Howard Street Tunnel in Baltimore and the Blue Ridge Subdivision on the North Carolina-Tennessee border within the next three weeks after being out of service for months. The Howard Street Tunnel has been closed since February, and service through the Blue Ridge Subdivision was suspended shortly after Hurricane Helene last fall. Sources familiar with the matter have told the Journal of Commerce CSX will hold ribbon-cutting ceremonies for the projects on Sept. 26 and Oct. 2, respectively, with regular service resuming shortly thereafter. CSX’s intermodal service faltered in the first quarter due to the two construction projects and winter weather in Georgia and the Carolinas. CSX’s Intermodal Service Z-Score, a Journal of Commerce index that benchmarks various service metrics reported to the US Surface Transportation Board (STB) against a railroad’s past performance, fell to its lowest reading since the COVID-19 pandemic. Service has since rebounded, with CSX’s current metrics exceeding historical averages dating back to 2017. “We were able to demonstrate you can actually get back to our leading industry performance, even without the projects being completed,” CSX President and CEO Joseph Hinrichs said during the Morgan Stanley Laguna Conference in Laguna Beach, California. “Once they’ve been completed, we should be able to take yet another step.” The reopening of the Blue Ridge Subdivision will restore faster service between the Midwest and the Southeast, eliminating detours imposed after Hurricane Helene struck Tennessee and the Carolinas nearly one year ago. The Howard Street Tunnel, built in the 1890s, previously allowed only single-stack trains and experienced drainage problems. The new, raised tunnel will be able to handle double-stack intermodal service, creating a new competitive option against trucks and rival Norfolk Southern Railway (NS). Although the tunnel will reopen later this month, bridge work still underway will delay double-stack service until next spring. Ceding the I-95 corridor to NS and the trucking industry has long been a weakness for CSX’s intermodal network. “We just don’t compete through [the I-95] corridor,” Hinrichs said, pointing specifically to shipments between Atlanta and the New York-New Jersey area. “We don’t even try. A lot of [the growth in those lanes] will be truck conversion, so we’re really excited about it.” Each year, about 25,000 domestic intermodal loads move from Atlanta to the New York-New Jersey region, according to a Journal of Commerce analysis of STB data. When Jacksonville, Fla., is included, CSX has been at a disadvantage on more than 30,000 shipments annually. The opportunity is even greater on the southbound leg. Nearly 50,000 domestic loads move each year from the New York-New Jersey region to Atlanta or Jacksonville, including significant parcel traffic from FedEx and UPS traveling in trailers and containers. CSX said the capabilities on the I-95 corridor could generate 75,000 to 125,000 additional loads per year, including intermodal and non-intermodal shipments. The company noted that customers have already begun preparing for the upgrade even though the railroad has not formally marketed any new services. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

Intermodal providers

CSX to reopen two East Coast intermodal lanes in early October

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Strong demand and the resulting tightening of intra-Asia vessel capacity is lifting intra-Asia rates, a sharp contrast to falling spot pricing on both the trans-Pacific and Asia-Europe trades. </div>

Strong demand and the resulting tightening of intra-Asia vessel capacity is lifting intra-Asia rates, a sharp contrast to falling spot pricing on both the trans-Pacific and Asia-Europe trades.

<div class="phx-topic">A surge of Southeast Asia cargo ahead of a manufacturing slowdown in China next month is filling up the holds of intra-Asia carriers, with vessels booked through September and early reports of rolled cargo. The tightening of vessel capacity serving Indonesia, Vietnam and Malaysia, lanes that feed the trans-Pacific trade, comes despite lackluster expectations for a pre-Golden Week surge of Chinese exports and reflects increased sourcing from Southeast Asia in the face of higher US tariffs on imports from China. Forwarders say the strong volumes are lifting intra-Asia rates, in sharp contrast to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ocean-market-in-trans-pacific-arrives-at-spot-pricing-tipping-point-6073669">falling spot pricing on both the trans-Pacific</a> and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/early-peak-new-vessels-could-tip-asia-europe-into-overcapacity-6077749 ">Asia-Europe trades</a>. The increase in demand has also caused a capacity shortage and port congestion in markets such as Indonesia, where most of the country’s major exporters are experiencing delays of two or three days, said Antonella Teodoro, MDS Transmodal senior consultant. The volume surge and resulting tightening of intra-Asia capacity reflects the “growing concentration of complex, high-value manufacturing within Asia and the need for stronger regional supply chains,” she said. The lack of space has caused some carriers to create so-called roll pools, holding cargo at origin to prioritize higher-yield bookings, Eunice Yu, head of ocean freight at Dachser Air &amp; Sea Logistics Asia Pacific in Hong Kong, told the Journal of Commerce. A FIBS Logistics spokesperson in Singapore said that some carriers, including SITC, CMA CGM subsidiary CNC Line, and Korea Maritime Transport Co. (KMTC), “are already fully booked on intra-Asia services to [Indonesia, Vietnam and Malaysia] until the end of September.” Forwarders also highlighted Indonesia as a particularly strong cargo market, with several intra-Asia carriers announcing a raft of new Indonesia-focused services. CNC Line, SeaLead and CK Shipping are launching the jointly operated China Indonesia Korea (CIK) service from Sept. 15, with direct connections from South Korea and central China to Indonesia. Pacific International Lines (PIL) said Tuesday it will commence a Korea China Indonesia (KCI) string on Oct. 13 that will follow an identical routing to the joint CIK loop. The top 10 carriers serving Southeast Asia by deployed capacity increased tonnage 10% year over year, to 4.7 million TEU in September, according to MDS Transmodal. Maersk drove the gains as part of its Gemini Cooperation alliance with Hapag-Lloyd, followed by CMA CGM, Mediterranean Shipping Co. (MSC) and SITC. Cosco Shipping remains the largest carrier in the highly fragmented intra-Asia market. In the longer term, factory closures in China due to the long October holiday are expected to temporarily soften the intra-Asia market before it “gradually picks up again in November, leading into the traditional fourth-quarter peak season, when rates should move higher than September levels,” Yu said. In the first half of 2025, non-oil-related trade by value between mainland China and Southeast Asia jumped nearly 46% compared to the year prior; in the four months ended in June, the US imported more from Southeast Asia than China for the first time since 2000, according to an analysis by investment bank HSBC. Contact Keith Wallis at <a href="mailto:keithwallis@hotmail.com">keithwallis@hotmail.com</a>.</div>

A surge of Southeast Asia cargo ahead of a manufacturing slowdown in China next month is filling up the holds of intra-Asia carriers, with vessels booked through September and early reports of rolled cargo. The tightening of vessel capacity serving Indonesia, Vietnam and Malaysia, lanes that feed the trans-Pacific trade, comes despite lackluster expectations for a pre-Golden Week surge of Chinese exports and reflects increased sourcing from Southeast Asia in the face of higher US tariffs on imports from China. Forwarders say the strong volumes are lifting intra-Asia rates, in sharp contrast to falling spot pricing on both the trans-Pacific and Asia-Europe trades . The increase in demand has also caused a capacity shortage and port congestion in markets such as Indonesia, where most of the country’s major exporters are experiencing delays of two or three days, said Antonella Teodoro, MDS Transmodal senior consultant. The volume surge and resulting tightening of intra-Asia capacity reflects the “growing concentration of complex, high-value manufacturing within Asia and the need for stronger regional supply chains,” she said. The lack of space has caused some carriers to create so-called roll pools, holding cargo at origin to prioritize higher-yield bookings, Eunice Yu, head of ocean freight at Dachser Air & Sea Logistics Asia Pacific in Hong Kong, told the Journal of Commerce. A FIBS Logistics spokesperson in Singapore said that some carriers, including SITC, CMA CGM subsidiary CNC Line, and Korea Maritime Transport Co. (KMTC), “are already fully booked on intra-Asia services to [Indonesia, Vietnam and Malaysia] until the end of September.” Forwarders also highlighted Indonesia as a particularly strong cargo market, with several intra-Asia carriers announcing a raft of new Indonesia-focused services. CNC Line, SeaLead and CK Shipping are launching the jointly operated China Indonesia Korea (CIK) service from Sept. 15, with direct connections from South Korea and central China to Indonesia. Pacific International Lines (PIL) said Tuesday it will commence a Korea China Indonesia (KCI) string on Oct. 13 that will follow an identical routing to the joint CIK loop. The top 10 carriers serving Southeast Asia by deployed capacity increased tonnage 10% year over year, to 4.7 million TEU in September, according to MDS Transmodal. Maersk drove the gains as part of its Gemini Cooperation alliance with Hapag-Lloyd, followed by CMA CGM, Mediterranean Shipping Co. (MSC) and SITC. Cosco Shipping remains the largest carrier in the highly fragmented intra-Asia market. In the longer term, factory closures in China due to the long October holiday are expected to temporarily soften the intra-Asia market before it “gradually picks up again in November, leading into the traditional fourth-quarter peak season, when rates should move higher than September levels,” Yu said. In the first half of 2025, non-oil-related trade by value between mainland China and Southeast Asia jumped nearly 46% compared to the year prior; in the four months ended in June, the US imported more from Southeast Asia than China for the first time since 2000, according to an analysis by investment bank HSBC. Contact Keith Wallis at keithwallis@hotmail.com .

Container Shipping News

Container lines

Surging Southeast Asia volumes strain intra-Asia capacity

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">There are measures carriers can take around the edges, but if they really want to take control of supply — and thus price — collectively sidelining some high-caliber tonnage is the standout solution, writes Jeremy Masters. </div>

There are measures carriers can take around the edges, but if they really want to take control of supply — and thus price — collectively sidelining some high-caliber tonnage is the standout solution, writes Jeremy Masters.

<div class="phx-topic">The laws of supply and demand dictate that prices will move in accordance with the relativity of the two. Container carriers can marginally move the dial between what is containerized and what is bulk or breakbulk by offering very attractive (low contribution) rates. An innovative product — for example, Gemini Cooperation’s high reliability network or an express service — might lure some air freight to sea freight. For the most part, however, carriers have very little control over demand. The key price lever that carriers have is slot supply, and current fundamentals point to heavy surplus, even as diversions around southern Africa continue. Are the carriers, then, sprinting to the edge of the cliff with newbuild deliveries, fresh orders, second-hand buying and chartering of what little spare capacity is left, followed by a freefall? Or do they at least have a parachute to slow down their momentum? There are some things they can do to help themselves in trades with overcapacity. <h3>Pushing pause </h3>The most obvious and dramatic way would be to park ships. To be impactful, that would mean collectively taking out multiple strings rather than tinkering with single strings or blank sailings. Understandably, there is a mental block in the big east-west trades when it comes to parking high-capacity, high-value, newer ships. But if the carriers get supply even minimally below demand, the economics are massively in their favor. Let's assume that, in the Asia-to-Europe trade, each consortium (for these purposes, Mediterranean Shipping Co. would be considered a consortium) ties up one string of ultra-large container vessels (ULCVs) that was forecasted to make a minimal contribution to fixed cost because of declining rates. If, because of removing these strings, freight rates were a very conservative $500 per TEU higher on average on the headhaul than they would have been, based on 20,000 TEU per week and 50 weeks, all consortiums would accumulate an additional $500,000 million per annum on all remaining loops. There would be, of course, some incremental lay-up costs, but other costs would remain similar. Parking some $3 billion worth of assets per consortium is easier in theory than in practice, especially for those carriers who need to justify some heavy investments to their boards. If the carriers accept that drastic action is required, however, and there is enough collective action — not orchestrated action, of course, in contravention of competition rules — then the results will be dramatically better, and the ships will be readily available for an upturn. <h3>Beyond parking </h3>Are there less capacity-eating measures that carriers could undertake? The catalyst for a major dive in multi-trade rates would be a return to the Red Sea and Suez Canal for Asia-to-Europe strings, but it's unlikely that we will go overnight from high-risk Red Sea transits to totally safe ones. Given the disruption and risk — for carriers and their clients — of moving all strings back to the Red Sea only to find that further issues arise, it would be entirely justifiable to keep some strings moving around the Cape of Good Hope. Big beneficial cargo owners (BCOs) and forwarders/non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOCCs) have — forcefully — adjusted to the Cape routing. And while there is higher on-the-water inventory cost, the weekly pipeline of arrivals are established. They would naturally lean towards the faster Red Sea routing, but at the same time, would want to strenuously avoid a situation where production lines are stopped or shelves empty because they have put all their eggs in the Red Sea basket that has turned bad again. This may be counterintuitive, given more expensive ship systems around the Cape, but carriers could also implement two-tier pricing to re-enforce this prudence — essentially, a premium for Red Sea risk or a deficit for longer transits, whichever you prefer. Slow-steaming is another area of capacity control where a systematic approach could eat up more capacity. This means not just applying it in over-tonnaged trades, but in all trades. Tonnage can then be moved from trades where there is oversupply to those that are short because of slow-steaming. Finally, there is the scrapping of older vessels. If we look at carriers' desire to hold onto bigger, newer assets and their purchase of relatively old smaller tonnage to run regional and feeder networks, this does not look to be a particularly encouraging area for capacity shedding. There are measures the carriers can take around the edges, but if they really want to take control of supply – and thus price – collectively sidelining some high-caliber tonnage is the standout solution. Contact Jeremy Masters at <a href="mailto:jeremy@shippingmastershk.com">jeremy@shippingmastershk.com</a>. </div>

The laws of supply and demand dictate that prices will move in accordance with the relativity of the two. Container carriers can marginally move the dial between what is containerized and what is bulk or breakbulk by offering very attractive (low contribution) rates. An innovative product — for example, Gemini Cooperation’s high reliability network or an express service — might lure some air freight to sea freight. For the most part, however, carriers have very little control over demand. The key price lever that carriers have is slot supply, and current fundamentals point to heavy surplus, even as diversions around southern Africa continue. Are the carriers, then, sprinting to the edge of the cliff with newbuild deliveries, fresh orders, second-hand buying and chartering of what little spare capacity is left, followed by a freefall? Or do they at least have a parachute to slow down their momentum? There are some things they can do to help themselves in trades with overcapacity. Pushing pause The most obvious and dramatic way would be to park ships. To be impactful, that would mean collectively taking out multiple strings rather than tinkering with single strings or blank sailings. Understandably, there is a mental block in the big east-west trades when it comes to parking high-capacity, high-value, newer ships. But if the carriers get supply even minimally below demand, the economics are massively in their favor. Let's assume that, in the Asia-to-Europe trade, each consortium (for these purposes, Mediterranean Shipping Co. would be considered a consortium) ties up one string of ultra-large container vessels (ULCVs) that was forecasted to make a minimal contribution to fixed cost because of declining rates. If, because of removing these strings, freight rates were a very conservative $500 per TEU higher on average on the headhaul than they would have been, based on 20,000 TEU per week and 50 weeks, all consortiums would accumulate an additional $500,000 million per annum on all remaining loops. There would be, of course, some incremental lay-up costs, but other costs would remain similar. Parking some $3 billion worth of assets per consortium is easier in theory than in practice, especially for those carriers who need to justify some heavy investments to their boards. If the carriers accept that drastic action is required, however, and there is enough collective action — not orchestrated action, of course, in contravention of competition rules — then the results will be dramatically better, and the ships will be readily available for an upturn. Beyond parking Are there less capacity-eating measures that carriers could undertake? The catalyst for a major dive in multi-trade rates would be a return to the Red Sea and Suez Canal for Asia-to-Europe strings, but it's unlikely that we will go overnight from high-risk Red Sea transits to totally safe ones. Given the disruption and risk — for carriers and their clients — of moving all strings back to the Red Sea only to find that further issues arise, it would be entirely justifiable to keep some strings moving around the Cape of Good Hope. Big beneficial cargo owners (BCOs) and forwarders/non-vessel operating common carriers (NVOCCs) have — forcefully — adjusted to the Cape routing. And while there is higher on-the-water inventory cost, the weekly pipeline of arrivals are established. They would naturally lean towards the faster Red Sea routing, but at the same time, would want to strenuously avoid a situation where production lines are stopped or shelves empty because they have put all their eggs in the Red Sea basket that has turned bad again. This may be counterintuitive, given more expensive ship systems around the Cape, but carriers could also implement two-tier pricing to re-enforce this prudence — essentially, a premium for Red Sea risk or a deficit for longer transits, whichever you prefer. Slow-steaming is another area of capacity control where a systematic approach could eat up more capacity. This means not just applying it in over-tonnaged trades, but in all trades. Tonnage can then be moved from trades where there is oversupply to those that are short because of slow-steaming. Finally, there is the scrapping of older vessels. If we look at carriers' desire to hold onto bigger, newer assets and their purchase of relatively old smaller tonnage to run regional and feeder networks, this does not look to be a particularly encouraging area for capacity shedding. There are measures the carriers can take around the edges, but if they really want to take control of supply – and thus price – collectively sidelining some high-caliber tonnage is the standout solution. Contact Jeremy Masters at jeremy@shippingmastershk.com .

Ocean carriers are not helpless when it comes to managing capacity

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The introduction of containerized shipping to Michigan presents an opportunity to reinforce the domestic maritime industrial base.</div>

The introduction of containerized shipping to Michigan presents an opportunity to reinforce the domestic maritime industrial base.

<div class="phx-topic">For decades, international containerized freight from Michigan and the broader Midwest has been routed through distant US coastal gateways such as New York, Norfolk and Savannah, or Canadian ports such as Halifax and Montreal. Export-side users have included automotive original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), steel and chemical producers and agricultural shippers, while imports have consisted of tier 1 suppliers, machinery and equipment distributors and retail or e-commerce consolidators. These routes were not chosen for efficiency or cost. They were imposed by federal restrictions that have for decades prevented containerized freight from entering or exiting the Great Lakes by vessel. US Customs today does not permit such movements through Michigan because no facility in the state meets the required federal standards for security and processing. That is about to change. In 2026, the Port of Monroe will activate the first SAFE Port Act-compliant international container terminal in the Great Lakes, along with a new roll-on/roll-off (ro/ro) platform that complements existing vessel berths, dual Class I rail access and proximity to interstate highways and Midwest manufacturing. Together, these assets position Monroe as a fully integrated inland gateway for containerized trade and high-value industrial logistics. Conservatively, 1 million to 2 million TEUs of oceangoing cargo are generated annually from the Great Lakes’ industrial core, according to port estimates. This includes high-value shipments from sectors such as automotive, machinery, chemicals and electronics. Rather than projecting future throughput volumes, the Port of Monroe is focused on establishing a lawful and functioning corridor, allowing the market to respond. The goal is to restore balance, provide carriers with a practical entry point and give shippers a logistics option that should have existed decades ago. The terminal at Monroe will be available to operators who recognize the value of establishing service in an underserved but strategically positioned market. The automotive industry, in particular, stands to benefit. With production concentrated in the Midwest and export demand on the rise, direct vessel service from Monroe reduces complexity and supports just-in-time inventory models. Monroe offers a new point of connection between Midwest production and global markets, serving as a strategic outlet for general containerized freight and, more uniquely, for the direct shipment of new vehicles via ro/ro or in containers. Resilience has become a defining priority for today’s logistics networks. The March 2024 collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, a critical ro/ro and vehicle export hub, exposed the system’s fragility. Overnight, cargo flows were disrupted, schedules were delayed and shippers were forced to reroute at significant cost. Inland ports such as the Port of Monroe offer a hedge against that kind of single-point failure. <h3>‘Manageable’ constraints </h3>Do the Great Lakes have constraints? Yes, but they are manageable. The annual three-month winter closure of the St. Lawrence Seaway is predictable and published well in advance, allowing cargo owners and carriers to plan accordingly. Intra-lake shipping continues throughout the winter, particularly with ice-class vessels. Recent climate trends indicate shorter freeze periods and milder conditions, which are gradually increasing intralake shipping capacity during the winter months. Other northern regions facing even harsher winter conditions have demonstrated what is possible. The Baltic Sea offers a relevant example. Despite a smaller economic footprint and more severe ice conditions, Baltic ports remain active year-round through the use of ice-capable vessels and integrated multimodal infrastructure. There is no reason the Great Lakes, now that the regulatory path has been cleared, should not do the same and make a comparable contribution to North American trade resilience. Unlike coastal gateways, which face sudden disruptions from hurricanes, labor action and infrastructure failures, the risks on the Great Lakes are stable and foreseeable. That reliability offers a competitive advantage for shippers navigating global volatility. But infrastructure alone is not enough. What is required is a shift in mindset. Federal freight policy must treat the Great Lakes as a fully integrated corridor. Carriers need to revisit assumptions about vessel size and routing patterns. Shippers will now be able to prioritize proximity, reliability and carbon performance rather than adhering to legacy paths shaped by outdated restrictions. The introduction of containerized shipping to Michigan presents an opportunity to reinforce the domestic maritime industrial base. Supporting inland container movement by vessel can drive demand for US-built ships, sustain skilled shipyard jobs, and expand the national maritime workforce. This is not just a logistics upgrade. It is a long-term investment in national capacity, employment, and competitiveness. This is a practical opportunity to enhance the national freight system using inland infrastructure that is efficient, cost-effective and underutilized. Monroe stands ready to serve shippers, carriers and policymakers seeking flexible, durable solutions. The Great Lakes have always had the potential to support containerized trade. Now that the path is open, the Port of Monroe is prepared to deliver. Capt. Paul C. LaMarre III is also director of the Port of Monroe in Michigan. Contact him at <a href="mailto:plamarre@portofmonroe.com">plamarre@portofmonroe.com</a>. </div>

For decades, international containerized freight from Michigan and the broader Midwest has been routed through distant US coastal gateways such as New York, Norfolk and Savannah, or Canadian ports such as Halifax and Montreal. Export-side users have included automotive original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), steel and chemical producers and agricultural shippers, while imports have consisted of tier 1 suppliers, machinery and equipment distributors and retail or e-commerce consolidators. These routes were not chosen for efficiency or cost. They were imposed by federal restrictions that have for decades prevented containerized freight from entering or exiting the Great Lakes by vessel. US Customs today does not permit such movements through Michigan because no facility in the state meets the required federal standards for security and processing. That is about to change. In 2026, the Port of Monroe will activate the first SAFE Port Act-compliant international container terminal in the Great Lakes, along with a new roll-on/roll-off (ro/ro) platform that complements existing vessel berths, dual Class I rail access and proximity to interstate highways and Midwest manufacturing. Together, these assets position Monroe as a fully integrated inland gateway for containerized trade and high-value industrial logistics. Conservatively, 1 million to 2 million TEUs of oceangoing cargo are generated annually from the Great Lakes’ industrial core, according to port estimates. This includes high-value shipments from sectors such as automotive, machinery, chemicals and electronics. Rather than projecting future throughput volumes, the Port of Monroe is focused on establishing a lawful and functioning corridor, allowing the market to respond. The goal is to restore balance, provide carriers with a practical entry point and give shippers a logistics option that should have existed decades ago. The terminal at Monroe will be available to operators who recognize the value of establishing service in an underserved but strategically positioned market. The automotive industry, in particular, stands to benefit. With production concentrated in the Midwest and export demand on the rise, direct vessel service from Monroe reduces complexity and supports just-in-time inventory models. Monroe offers a new point of connection between Midwest production and global markets, serving as a strategic outlet for general containerized freight and, more uniquely, for the direct shipment of new vehicles via ro/ro or in containers. Resilience has become a defining priority for today’s logistics networks. The March 2024 collapse of the Francis Scott Key Bridge in Baltimore, a critical ro/ro and vehicle export hub, exposed the system’s fragility. Overnight, cargo flows were disrupted, schedules were delayed and shippers were forced to reroute at significant cost. Inland ports such as the Port of Monroe offer a hedge against that kind of single-point failure. ‘Manageable’ constraints Do the Great Lakes have constraints? Yes, but they are manageable. The annual three-month winter closure of the St. Lawrence Seaway is predictable and published well in advance, allowing cargo owners and carriers to plan accordingly. Intra-lake shipping continues throughout the winter, particularly with ice-class vessels. Recent climate trends indicate shorter freeze periods and milder conditions, which are gradually increasing intralake shipping capacity during the winter months. Other northern regions facing even harsher winter conditions have demonstrated what is possible. The Baltic Sea offers a relevant example. Despite a smaller economic footprint and more severe ice conditions, Baltic ports remain active year-round through the use of ice-capable vessels and integrated multimodal infrastructure. There is no reason the Great Lakes, now that the regulatory path has been cleared, should not do the same and make a comparable contribution to North American trade resilience. Unlike coastal gateways, which face sudden disruptions from hurricanes, labor action and infrastructure failures, the risks on the Great Lakes are stable and foreseeable. That reliability offers a competitive advantage for shippers navigating global volatility. But infrastructure alone is not enough. What is required is a shift in mindset. Federal freight policy must treat the Great Lakes as a fully integrated corridor. Carriers need to revisit assumptions about vessel size and routing patterns. Shippers will now be able to prioritize proximity, reliability and carbon performance rather than adhering to legacy paths shaped by outdated restrictions. The introduction of containerized shipping to Michigan presents an opportunity to reinforce the domestic maritime industrial base. Supporting inland container movement by vessel can drive demand for US-built ships, sustain skilled shipyard jobs, and expand the national maritime workforce. This is not just a logistics upgrade. It is a long-term investment in national capacity, employment, and competitiveness. This is a practical opportunity to enhance the national freight system using inland infrastructure that is efficient, cost-effective and underutilized. Monroe stands ready to serve shippers, carriers and policymakers seeking flexible, durable solutions. The Great Lakes have always had the potential to support containerized trade. Now that the path is open, the Port of Monroe is prepared to deliver. Capt. Paul C. LaMarre III is also director of the Port of Monroe in Michigan. Contact him at plamarre@portofmonroe.com .

Marine terminals

Ro/ro cargo

North American ports

Port infrastructure

Michigan inland port offers new option for Great Lakes containerized freight

 Actual capacity

{name} 
{valueY.formatNumber('###,###.')}

Planned capacity

Blanked capacity

eeSea collects and centralizes liner network data from dozens of public sources including carriers’ vessel tracking portals, long-term schedules, customer advisories, port and terminal operator schedules, and pilot schedules. These disparate datasets are continually inspected, cleaned, and carefully structured. eeSea synthesizes this refined public data with AIS positions from a third-party provider and its datasets spanning schedule reliability, transit times, trade capacity evolution, and 60-day vessel forecasts. Capacity is measured based on the last load port in Asia [eeSea](https://www.eesea.com)

Asia to US West Coast container capacity (eeSea)

Asia to US West Coast container capacity(eeSea)

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Knight-Swift already partners with both UP and NS, so a combined transcontinental railroad would fit nicely into its existing service for shippers.</div>

Knight-Swift already partners with both UP and NS, so a combined transcontinental railroad would fit nicely into its existing service for shippers.

<div class="phx-topic">Knight-Swift Transportation said Tuesday it believes US regulators should approve Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) acquisition of Norfolk Southern Railway (NS), becoming the fourth major intermodal provider to publicly back the $85 billion deal. Swift Intermodal, Knight-Swift’s intermodal division, already partners with both UP and NS, making the acquisition a natural fit for its existing intermodal network. A combined transcontinental railroad would require little to no adjustment for Swift, and it could reap the rewards of eliminating time-consuming interchanges in cities such as Chicago, Memphis and New Orleans. “By knitting together a coast-to-coast rail network, Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern are creating new efficiencies that will benefit everyone — from logistics providers like us to our customers, to the end-consumers,” Knight-Swift CEO Adam Miller said in a statement. “As a company that operates thousands of trucks and thousands of intermodal containers, we know the power of combining modes. This unified rail system will let us seamlessly integrate our trucking with rail on cross-country shipments like never before.” Knight-Swift’s intermodal division owns about 12,000 containers, hauling nearly 150,000 loads across all North American railroads annually. It is the fifth-largest asset-owning intermodal provider in the US behind J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Hub Group, Schneider National and STG Logistics. Knight-Swift joins <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/up-ns-deal-would-trigger-unnecessary-wave-of-rail-mergers-cpkc-6069870">C.R. England, Hub Group, and Mode Transportation</a> as supporters of the UP-NS deal, which would create the US’ first transcontinental railroad and requires approval from the US Surface Transportation Board (STB), which could come sometime in 2027. <h3>Political football </h3>While UP and NS have until January to file their formal application to the STB, the railroads received a boost last week when the Trump administration moved to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/trump-move-to-oust-stbs-primus-boosts-likelihood-of-up-ns-approval-6070952">fire board member</a> Robert Primus, who has been vocal in his opposition to consolidation in the rail industry. The Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transportation Union and its transportation division (SMART-TD), has come out against the UP-NS transaction and criticized the attempted removal of Primus. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET), another large rail union, has not taken a position on the proposed acquisition. Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) opposes the deal and last week ruled out a potential merger with the other eastern US railroad, CSX Transportation. Canadian National Railway has not commented publicly on the UP-NS deal. Schneider National and STG Logistics, two other large asset-based partners of UP, have not taken a position on the proposed acquisition. Both partner with CSX in the eastern US, making a UP-NS transcontinental railroad more complicated for their intermodal networks. Contact Ari Ashe at <a href="mailto:ari.ashe@spglobal.com">ari.ashe@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Knight-Swift Transportation said Tuesday it believes US regulators should approve Union Pacific Railroad’s (UP’s) acquisition of Norfolk Southern Railway (NS), becoming the fourth major intermodal provider to publicly back the $85 billion deal. Swift Intermodal, Knight-Swift’s intermodal division, already partners with both UP and NS, making the acquisition a natural fit for its existing intermodal network. A combined transcontinental railroad would require little to no adjustment for Swift, and it could reap the rewards of eliminating time-consuming interchanges in cities such as Chicago, Memphis and New Orleans. “By knitting together a coast-to-coast rail network, Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern are creating new efficiencies that will benefit everyone — from logistics providers like us to our customers, to the end-consumers,” Knight-Swift CEO Adam Miller said in a statement. “As a company that operates thousands of trucks and thousands of intermodal containers, we know the power of combining modes. This unified rail system will let us seamlessly integrate our trucking with rail on cross-country shipments like never before.” Knight-Swift’s intermodal division owns about 12,000 containers, hauling nearly 150,000 loads across all North American railroads annually. It is the fifth-largest asset-owning intermodal provider in the US behind J.B. Hunt Transport Services, Hub Group, Schneider National and STG Logistics. Knight-Swift joins C.R. England, Hub Group, and Mode Transportation as supporters of the UP-NS deal, which would create the US’ first transcontinental railroad and requires approval from the US Surface Transportation Board (STB), which could come sometime in 2027. Political football While UP and NS have until January to file their formal application to the STB, the railroads received a boost last week when the Trump administration moved to fire board member Robert Primus, who has been vocal in his opposition to consolidation in the rail industry. The Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transportation Union and its transportation division (SMART-TD), has come out against the UP-NS transaction and criticized the attempted removal of Primus. The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET), another large rail union, has not taken a position on the proposed acquisition. Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC) opposes the deal and last week ruled out a potential merger with the other eastern US railroad, CSX Transportation. Canadian National Railway has not commented publicly on the UP-NS deal. Schneider National and STG Logistics, two other large asset-based partners of UP, have not taken a position on the proposed acquisition. Both partner with CSX in the eastern US, making a UP-NS transcontinental railroad more complicated for their intermodal networks. Contact Ari Ashe at ari.ashe@spglobal.com .

Knight-Swift says it backs Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern deal

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Ocean carriers are seeking to curb the sharp decline in spot rates in the run-up to next month’s Golden Week holiday. </div>

Ocean carriers are seeking to curb the sharp decline in spot rates in the run-up to next month’s Golden Week holiday.

<div class="phx-topic">The next few weeks on the trans-Pacific trade will be telling as time is running out for container lines to adjust capacity to falling demand or risk losing contracted cargo to the spot market. A slight bump last week in container spot rates, as measured by the Platts and Shanghai Shipping Exchange indexes, could be a sign of blank sailings ending the sharp dive in rates that began in late May, or merely a blip. The run-up to Golden Week that starts Oct. 1, a period of slowing China production due to the holiday observance, gives carriers the last major window this year to stem the rate bleed or see shippers neglect contracted allocations in favor of cheaper spot rates. Ocean carriers are seeking rate increases of $800 to $900 per FEU, sources say, with one carrier representative noting the efforts are focused on curbing the rate erosion of the last two months. Container spot rates from Asia to the US West Coast are about $2,000 per FEU, according to various indexes, with the Shanghai Shipping Exchange registering a 65% drop since June. Bullet rates quoted for single voyages tend to be $200 to $300 less than index rates, and some forwarder quotes for US West Coast routings have been as low as $1,300-$1,400 per FEU.Container lines thus far have been modest in blanking capacity despite falling rates and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-retailers-project-big-year-over-year-import-declines-to-close-out-2025-6060323">weak forecasts for year-end volumes</a>. But analysts and forwarders warn that a sharp increase in blanks is nearly inevitable. Carriers’ averseness to losing import <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/toll-of-us-tariffs-begins-to-emerge-on-unsettled-trans-pacific-6065761">volumes already weakened by US tariff frontloading</a>, the potential for a late-year surge, and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/niche-carriers-plan-to-ride-out-declining-spot-rates-on-the-trans-pacific-6071722">niche carriers sticking to the trade</a> have kept blanking levels consistent with past years. <h3>More capacity coming in October </h3>Container lines plan to inject more capacity in October, nonetheless, adding nearly 100,000 TEUs more than what’s deployed in September, according to maritime intelligence provider eeSea. The share of tonnage deployed on Asia to the US West Coast that is made unusable through blank sailings hovered near 8.4% in August, and carriers so far plan to blank a similar proportion of tonnage in September and October, although that can rise as weeks progress. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="d0dc514b-60a6-4b10-862a-081c37b36db2"></dynamic-object></div>If carriers can’t adjust demand to supply, they face the risk of more shippers turning to the spot market rather than fulfilling contracted cargo allocations. Spot rates, as measured by various indexes, are at levels that many small and medium-sized shippers signed contracts at in the spring. Short-term ocean rates, as measured by benchmarking provider Xeneta, began falling in early August below contract rates covering 88 days or more. The short-term cost to ship an FEU from Asia to the US West Coast was $1,319 for the week ending Aug. 28, compared with $1,597 for the long-term rate in the same period. “We've got customers who are eager to save $100 anywhere, and they want a piece of that,” said a forwarder who did not want to be identified. “We are not trying to sell it, but when they ask us, ‘What are your FAK rates?’ We can’t tell them, ‘No, we’re not going to offer you our FAK rates,’ especially if it means we’re going to get some incremental business out of it.”<div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="98a0037a-3658-44f2-86a3-be3148b993eb"></dynamic-object></div>Small and medium-sized importers signed service contract rates at a larger-than-usual premium than the largest retailers in mid-April just as the market was showing strength, said another forwarder. The largest big-box retailers signed contracts that generally began May 1 in the range of $1,600 to $1,800 per FEU, while midsize and smaller importers secured contract rates in the range of $2,000 to $2,200 per FEU. The danger importers face chasing cheaper spot rates when the rates are falling is that carriers will be loath to help out cargo owners when the market inevitably tightens — even if it’s short-lived. Container lines are more agile in moving vessels to and from ocean trades by omitting calls to ports or voiding sailings, according to an Aug. 28 notice sent by forwarder American Shipping Co. to its customers that was seen by the Journal of Commerce. While such tools to manage capacity haven’t had much impact in recent months, “if timed right, it can have a direct impact on the freight rates,” the notice read. Most shippers are not concerned about carriers charging them for dead freight if they do not fill the minimum quantity commitments (MQCs) in their contracts because, historically, carriers have never done that. Carriers normally roll over the unused MQCs into the next year’s contracts. So far, the shift from contracted cargo to spot cargo has been minimal, according to forwarders and carriers who spoke with the Journal of Commerce. But the inflection point is getting closer. “It could happen” that more BCOs turn to the spot market if rates reverse course in the coming weeks and begin dropping again toward $1,600 to the West Coast and $2,600 to the East Coast, said Benton Kauffman, head of trans-Pacific air and sea logistics at forwarder DSV Global Logistics. “If the West Coast spot rate sinks to $1,400, some BCOs will seek to reopen their contracts, or they could book more under spot,” Kauffman said. Contact Mark Szakonyi at <a href="mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com">mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com</a>. Senior Editor Bill Mongelluzzo and Associate Editor Laura Robb contributed to this report. </div>

The next few weeks on the trans-Pacific trade will be telling as time is running out for container lines to adjust capacity to falling demand or risk losing contracted cargo to the spot market. A slight bump last week in container spot rates, as measured by the Platts and Shanghai Shipping Exchange indexes, could be a sign of blank sailings ending the sharp dive in rates that began in late May, or merely a blip. The run-up to Golden Week that starts Oct. 1, a period of slowing China production due to the holiday observance, gives carriers the last major window this year to stem the rate bleed or see shippers neglect contracted allocations in favor of cheaper spot rates. Ocean carriers are seeking rate increases of $800 to $900 per FEU, sources say, with one carrier representative noting the efforts are focused on curbing the rate erosion of the last two months. Container spot rates from Asia to the US West Coast are about $2,000 per FEU, according to various indexes, with the Shanghai Shipping Exchange registering a 65% drop since June. Bullet rates quoted for single voyages tend to be $200 to $300 less than index rates, and some forwarder quotes for US West Coast routings have been as low as $1,300-$1,400 per FEU. Container lines thus far have been modest in blanking capacity despite falling rates and weak forecasts for year-end volumes . But analysts and forwarders warn that a sharp increase in blanks is nearly inevitable. Carriers’ averseness to losing import volumes already weakened by US tariff frontloading , the potential for a late-year surge, and niche carriers sticking to the trade have kept blanking levels consistent with past years. More capacity coming in October Container lines plan to inject more capacity in October, nonetheless, adding nearly 100,000 TEUs more than what’s deployed in September, according to maritime intelligence provider eeSea. The share of tonnage deployed on Asia to the US West Coast that is made unusable through blank sailings hovered near 8.4% in August, and carriers so far plan to blank a similar proportion of tonnage in September and October, although that can rise as weeks progress. If carriers can’t adjust demand to supply, they face the risk of more shippers turning to the spot market rather than fulfilling contracted cargo allocations. Spot rates, as measured by various indexes, are at levels that many small and medium-sized shippers signed contracts at in the spring. Short-term ocean rates, as measured by benchmarking provider Xeneta, began falling in early August below contract rates covering 88 days or more. The short-term cost to ship an FEU from Asia to the US West Coast was $1,319 for the week ending Aug. 28, compared with $1,597 for the long-term rate in the same period. “We've got customers who are eager to save $100 anywhere, and they want a piece of that,” said a forwarder who did not want to be identified. “We are not trying to sell it, but when they ask us, ‘What are your FAK rates?’ We can’t tell them, ‘No, we’re not going to offer you our FAK rates,’ especially if it means we’re going to get some incremental business out of it.” Small and medium-sized importers signed service contract rates at a larger-than-usual premium than the largest retailers in mid-April just as the market was showing strength, said another forwarder. The largest big-box retailers signed contracts that generally began May 1 in the range of $1,600 to $1,800 per FEU, while midsize and smaller importers secured contract rates in the range of $2,000 to $2,200 per FEU. The danger importers face chasing cheaper spot rates when the rates are falling is that carriers will be loath to help out cargo owners when the market inevitably tightens — even if it’s short-lived. Container lines are more agile in moving vessels to and from ocean trades by omitting calls to ports or voiding sailings, according to an Aug. 28 notice sent by forwarder American Shipping Co. to its customers that was seen by the Journal of Commerce. While such tools to manage capacity haven’t had much impact in recent months, “if timed right, it can have a direct impact on the freight rates,” the notice read. Most shippers are not concerned about carriers charging them for dead freight if they do not fill the minimum quantity commitments (MQCs) in their contracts because, historically, carriers have never done that. Carriers normally roll over the unused MQCs into the next year’s contracts. So far, the shift from contracted cargo to spot cargo has been minimal, according to forwarders and carriers who spoke with the Journal of Commerce. But the inflection point is getting closer. “It could happen” that more BCOs turn to the spot market if rates reverse course in the coming weeks and begin dropping again toward $1,600 to the West Coast and $2,600 to the East Coast, said Benton Kauffman, head of trans-Pacific air and sea logistics at forwarder DSV Global Logistics. “If the West Coast spot rate sinks to $1,400, some BCOs will seek to reopen their contracts, or they could book more under spot,” Kauffman said. Contact Mark Szakonyi at mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com . Senior Editor Bill Mongelluzzo and Associate Editor Laura Robb contributed to this report.

Forwarding

Trans-Pacific

Ocean market in trans-Pacific arrives at spot pricing tipping point

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The Montreal Port Authority (MPA) is expected later this fall to announce the winning bid to run the Contrecoeur terminal. </div>

The Montreal Port Authority (MPA) is expected later this fall to announce the winning bid to run the Contrecoeur terminal.

<div class="phx-topic">DP World is seeking to operate a long-planned, nearly C$1.6 billion container terminal in Montreal that the new Canadian government is backing amid its shift away from US trade dependence.The Montreal Port Authority (MPA) is expected later this fall to announce the winning bid to run the Contrecoeur terminal, which, with an annual capacity of 1.15 million TEUs, would increase Canada’s second-largest container port by capacity 150%. DP World, which operates at Vancouver and Prince Rupert the first- and third-largest ports in Canada, respectively, <a href="https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-08-29/dp-world-vies-for-deal-to-run-montreal-port-championed-by-carney">confirmed to Bloomberg</a> that it was involved in project negotiations. DP said in a statement it was always exploring ways to expand its network in Canada and increase investment in the country. “While we see strong potential for developing logistics infrastructure in Montreal that drives economic growth and long-term value, we have no announcements to share at this time,” said a DP World spokesperson. Since the port failed to attract a bidder in 2021, the <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/quebec-provides-new-funding-for-proposed-montreal-terminal-citing-us-trade-tensions-5947783">Contrecoeur project has received</a> C$130 million from the Quebec provincial government and C$130 million from Canada’s infrastructure bank for construction. Prime Minister Mark Carney last week said that he was seeking to fast-track the Contrecoeur project and highlighted <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/carney-has-fresh-opportunity-to-galvanize-canadian-shipping-industry-6047928">newly passed legislation streamlining regulatory</a> approval for major infrastructure projects. The C$1.57 billion project, which is located 43 miles downriver from legacy Montreal terminals along the St. Lawrence River, requires extensive dredging and shoring up portions of the waterway. MPA seeks to begin construction as early as October and open the facility in 2029. The authority in 2022 <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/montreal-relaunches-search-process-for-contrecoeur-terminal-operator-5204826">sent bid invitations</a> to Axium Infrastructure Canada and Pomerleau Capital, Ports America Holdings, and Terminal Investment Limited, in which Mediterranean Shipping Co. owns a majority stake. The port originally planned to have the first phase of the project finished by 2024 and had identified three finalist but scrapped plans. DP World operates the Centerm facility in Vancouver and solely operates at Prince Rupert and Port Saint John. Montreal’s four existing container terminals are operated by two companies, Montreal Gateway Terminals Partnership and Termont Montreal.Container volumes through Montreal last year slipped 1%, to approximately 750,500 TEUs compared with 2023, according to MPA. Sporadic labor issues and the Port of New York and New Jersey’s ability to attract more exports from the Midwest have contributed to volume declines in recent years, with traffic down 8.9% in 2024 compared with 2020. Container volume, however, is up nearly 6.5% in the first seven months of this year on a year-over-year basis. While the port began the project in the late 1980s, work has gathered speed in the last decade, Julie Gascon, CEO and president of MPA, said on a Journal of Commerce webinar on May 22. The need to diversify away from US trade due to high tariffs has only added more momentum to the project. “If there is a 6% shift of Canadian exports from us to other international markets, Montreal would get at capacity very, very quickly, so it’s not just a project for the future, it’s a project that is urgent,” Gascon said. Contact Mark Szakonyi at <a href="mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com">mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

DP World is seeking to operate a long-planned, nearly C$1.6 billion container terminal in Montreal that the new Canadian government is backing amid its shift away from US trade dependence. The Montreal Port Authority (MPA) is expected later this fall to announce the winning bid to run the Contrecoeur terminal, which, with an annual capacity of 1.15 million TEUs, would increase Canada’s second-largest container port by capacity 150%. DP World, which operates at Vancouver and Prince Rupert the first- and third-largest ports in Canada, respectively, confirmed to Bloomberg that it was involved in project negotiations. DP said in a statement it was always exploring ways to expand its network in Canada and increase investment in the country. “While we see strong potential for developing logistics infrastructure in Montreal that drives economic growth and long-term value, we have no announcements to share at this time,” said a DP World spokesperson. Since the port failed to attract a bidder in 2021, the Contrecoeur project has received C$130 million from the Quebec provincial government and C$130 million from Canada’s infrastructure bank for construction. Prime Minister Mark Carney last week said that he was seeking to fast-track the Contrecoeur project and highlighted newly passed legislation streamlining regulatory approval for major infrastructure projects. The C$1.57 billion project, which is located 43 miles downriver from legacy Montreal terminals along the St. Lawrence River, requires extensive dredging and shoring up portions of the waterway. MPA seeks to begin construction as early as October and open the facility in 2029. The authority in 2022 sent bid invitations to Axium Infrastructure Canada and Pomerleau Capital, Ports America Holdings, and Terminal Investment Limited, in which Mediterranean Shipping Co. owns a majority stake. The port originally planned to have the first phase of the project finished by 2024 and had identified three finalist but scrapped plans. DP World operates the Centerm facility in Vancouver and solely operates at Prince Rupert and Port Saint John. Montreal’s four existing container terminals are operated by two companies, Montreal Gateway Terminals Partnership and Termont Montreal. Container volumes through Montreal last year slipped 1%, to approximately 750,500 TEUs compared with 2023, according to MPA. Sporadic labor issues and the Port of New York and New Jersey’s ability to attract more exports from the Midwest have contributed to volume declines in recent years, with traffic down 8.9% in 2024 compared with 2020. Container volume, however, is up nearly 6.5% in the first seven months of this year on a year-over-year basis. While the port began the project in the late 1980s, work has gathered speed in the last decade, Julie Gascon, CEO and president of MPA, said on a Journal of Commerce webinar on May 22. The need to diversify away from US trade due to high tariffs has only added more momentum to the project. “If there is a 6% shift of Canadian exports from us to other international markets, Montreal would get at capacity very, very quickly, so it’s not just a project for the future, it’s a project that is urgent,” Gascon said. Contact Mark Szakonyi at mark.szakonyi@spglobal.com .

Port News

DP World aims to run Carney-backed Montreal terminal

Use code GTW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of an annual Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription - Gold Trials

Become a Gold Subscriber and Save!

Arm your team with the most trusted information portal for the international container shipping industry.

Group Subscriptions - Wide Box

Get into a group subscription today

Use code ESSW30 at checkout to save 30% on a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription! 

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to S/SP - Wide Box

END OF SUMMER SALE EXTENDED

Use code ESSW595 at checkout to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Wide Box

Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Wide Box

START A FREE TRIAL TODAY

Use code ESSGW995 at checkout to save $500 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Wide Box

In today’s competitive logistical landscape, efficiency is an absolute necessity for smooth operations. Yet, in the barge sector, many operators still rely on fragmented systems, delayed updates, and manual tracking methods that slow decision-making and increase operational risk. OpenTug’s new eBook, How Enhanced Visibility Transforms Barge Operations, reveals how unified, real-time data can become your competitive advantage leading to improved voyage management and more actionable insights. Drawing on industry best practices and real-world examples, it explores how operational transparency empowers teams to: ●	Reduce delays with accurate ETAs and proactive scheduling decisions ●	Improve asset utilization by identifying underused equipment and optimizing cargos ●	Strengthen safety and compliance through consistent, accessible documentation and reporting ●	Boost customer satisfaction with transparent status updates and faster response time You’ll learn how visibility can connect every part of your operation into a single, actionable view. The ability to see and act on real-time information transforms the way you plan, execute, and deliver. From managing a small regional fleet to running a large, national operation, this eBook will help you understand the measurable benefits of enhanced visibility and how technology like BargeOS is transforming the way barge logistics is managed. Get your copy today and see how clear insights lead to stronger performance, smarter decisions, and more profitable operations. <a href="https://9315820.fs1.hubspotusercontent-na1.net/hubfs/9315820/eBook/Nav-theFuture-AJW-08.19.25.pdf" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">Click here</a><span class="joc_admin__inline-image joc_admin__inline-image-aspect-ratio-16_9 joc_admin__inline-image-position-left joc_admin__inline-image-size-small" data-figure-size="small" data-figure-position="left" data-figure-aspect-ratio="16:9"><img src="/content-assets/1756152344211_Opentug%20logo.png" alt="" class="joc_admin__inline-image-inherit">

Opentug11.png

Transform Barge Operations with Total Visibility

At SSA Marine Mexico, we firmly believe that business development must go hand in hand with social and environmental well-being. Our vision is not solely focused on operating efficiently, but also on creating a meaningful and positive impact in the communities where we are present. Since 1995, we have reaffirmed this commitment through tangible actions that reflect our core values of responsibility, solidarity, and sustainability. <span class="joc_admin__inline-image joc_admin__inline-image-aspect-ratio-3_2 joc_admin__inline-image-position-left joc_admin__inline-image-size-medium" data-figure-size="medium" data-figure-position="left" data-figure-aspect-ratio="3:2"><img src="/content-assets/1752584535914_Photo%201.jpg" alt="" class="joc_admin__inline-image-inherit"> A Year of Major Achievements Over the past year, we allocated more than $107,000 USD to the implementation of 60 social and environmental projects, positively impacting over 7,800 people across various regions of Mexico. Each initiative was designed with a holistic approach, addressing key areas that contribute to long-term community development. Education: Laying the Foundation for the Future Education is one of the most powerful tools to promote social mobility and equitable development. At SSA Marine Mexico, we support academic initiatives that inspire and empower the next generation of leaders. One of our most impactful partnerships was with the University of Colima, where we sponsored the “Reto Camp” program. This initiative encourages university students to develop innovative solutions in the fields of sustainability, logistics, and port operations, offering them mentorship, tools, and real-world challenges to solve. In addition, we donated microscopes, school supplies, and educational materials to institutions in underserved communities, helping to improve the learning environment and provide students with the resources they need to succeed. Health and Sports: Promoting Wellness We believe that healthy communities are strong communities. We have supported several local sporting events and provided direct assistance to talented athletes, enabling them to pursue their passions and represent their regions with pride. Beyond sports, we also strengthened our collaboration with critical emergency response organizations such as the Mexican Red Cross and Civil Protection. Our contributions helped enhance their readiness and capabilities in times of crisis, ensuring better outcomes for those affected by emergencies. Supporting Vulnerable Groups: Reaching Those Who Need It Most A core part of our social responsibility efforts is directed toward supporting vulnerable populations. We have contributed to a range of initiatives focused on children, migrants, and at-risk families. These efforts included donations to orphanages and shelters, as well as support for the National Institute of Migration and grassroots organizations dedicated to protecting and empowering people facing adversity. By standing with those in need, we reinforce our commitment to inclusion and social justice, values that are central to our identity as a responsible company. <span class="joc_admin__inline-image joc_admin__inline-image-aspect-ratio-3_2 joc_admin__inline-image-position-left joc_admin__inline-image-size-medium" data-figure-size="medium" data-figure-position="left" data-figure-aspect-ratio="3:2"><img src="/content-assets/1752584944645_Photo%202.png" alt="" class="joc_admin__inline-image-inherit">Culture: Strengthening Community Identity Cultural identity is a key element in building resilient and united communities. At SSA Marine Mexico, we actively participate in the organization and sponsorship of cultural events that celebrate local traditions and foster civic pride. Working alongside port authorities and municipal governments, we helped bring music, art, and heritage to the forefront, creating spaces for community engagement and intercultural dialogue. Environment: Investing in the Planet Our commitment to sustainability goes beyond operations—it’s a philosophy that drives every decision we make. We have partnered with environmental institutions to carry out reforestation campaigns, beach cleanups, and conservation efforts. In collaboration with the Institute for the Environment, we supported initiatives aimed at decarbonization, biodiversity protection, and environmental education. By involving our employees and local volunteers in these actions, we also foster a culture of environmental stewardship throughout our organization and our surrounding communities. Innovation for a Sustainable Future Sustainability is not just about doing good—it’s also about doing things better. In 2024, we invested $22 million USD in the acquisition of 11 state-of-the-art E-RTG cranes. These electric rubber-tired gantry cranes represent a significant technological advancement in port equipment. Seven of them are already operating on clean electric energy, resulting in a reduction of nearly 4,000 tons of CO₂ emissions and improving operational efficiency by 7%. The remaining four cranes are fully compatible with future electrification, underscoring our long-term strategy to modernize our operations in an environmentally responsible way. This investment is part of a broader innovation roadmap that includes digitalization, automation, and cleaner energy sources—all designed to ensure that our ports continue to grow without compromising the health of our planet. Building a Better Tomorrow, Together At SSA Marine Mexico, we understand that sustainability is a shared and ongoing responsibility. True impact requires collaboration across sectors, long-term vision, and unwavering commitment. That is why we continue to work hand-in-hand with local authorities, non-profit organizations, universities, and our own employees to create solutions that are both scalable and sustainable. Our journey is far from over. In the years ahead, we will continue to deepen our community engagement, explore cleaner technologies, and strengthen the social fabric of the regions where we operate. Each initiative, no matter the size, is a step toward building a future where business success goes hand-in-hand with human and environmental prosperity. We are proud of what we have achieved in 2024, but we are even more excited about what lies ahead. SSA Marine Mexico — Moving the World, Caring for People and Planet. LINK: <a href="https://www.ssamarine.mx/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">https://www.ssamarine.mx/</a>

Photo 2.png

SSA Marine Mexico: True Commitment to Sustainability

The world of LTL is slow to embrace change. Business anachronisms permeate current supply chain processes. These vestiges of the way things used to work define the LTL freight transportation procurement process of many modern shippers.David Knuth, logistics specialist at IEWC, a global supplier of cable and wire based in Wisconsin, is happy to have modernized the RFP process, automating the entire LTL bidding procedure with Bid$ense, SMC³’s automated truckload and LTL freight transportation sourcing solution. But when prompted, he can still recall what once was.In his previous job, a large part of his duties were consumed by creating an intermodal bid package for carriers. In a spreadsheet, Knuth detailed the company’s volumes lane by lane, taking care to delete any errant keystrokes or misleading data. He would then email out the information to each carrier, taking time to respond to detailed technical questions about the spreadsheet data. Finally, he had to compile all the results, create an algorithm that would compare the carriers on each lane, and award the business.“It was a huge undertaking. It took about four months to do,” Knuth said of the old process. “It was almost a full-time job for that part of the year, every year.”In his new job at IEWC, he sat down with Bid$ense on day one and was amazed at the capabilities. Knuth had never before used a bid tool. SMC³’s latest versions of Bid$ense automate the process even further, taking truckload and LTL RFPs entirely online. The tool draws on RFP best-practices protocols to streamline the bidding communication process, enabling bidding carriers to respond accurately and promptly to shipper requests. The solution also does all the distribution work automatically, electronically submitting shipper bid data to carriers based on their actual service capabilities and performance records. Carriers are alerted with timely prompts for RFP deliverables, so shippers aren’t waiting by the phone for responses.Another benefit of automating the process is the data-cleansing assistance. When Knuth sent spreadsheets to carriers, data errors might cloud the bidding process; he might have to resend data or simply accept a price that did not truly reflect the costs of doing business. Data cleansing is incredibly beneficial, he said.The spreadsheet technique also made bidding analysis an onerous task. Since Bid$ense automates and streamlines the entire RFP process, intensive examination is now simple. SMC³ knows that each bid has more than one best outcome. With uniform responses from each carrier, shippers can quickly rank results and create an unlimited quantity of what-if scenarios to make the optimal procurement decision.Jesse Burnett of Central Garden &amp; Pet experiences many of the same benefits. Founded in 1980, Central Garden &amp; Pet has spent the last three decades growing from a small garden supply company to a provider of a range of products from dog chews and bird seed to soil supplements and natural insecticides. For much of its life, the company shipped these disparate goods via LTL and truckload carriers to retailers throughout the country, relying on each business unit to negotiate directly with their freight transportation providers. This arrangement worked fairly well for a small company, but as Central Garden &amp; Pet expanded, leadership decided to consolidate decision making.Burnett helped centralize the transportation decision making in 2015 with SMC³’s Bid$ense. Before Bid$ense, every business unit operated independently as far as negotiating with carriers.“There were a lot of different things just floating around,” he said. “We didn’t have master agreements in place; no national pricing at all. The pricing from carriers was just all over the place, depending on where you were.”The transformations he saw with Bid$ense were immediate. Burnett has been using the tool about every other year since its implementation at the company. Central Garden and Pet’s $19.6 million 2019 LTL bid saved the company just more than 9 percent when compared to its historical average. For Burnett, though, bid automation extends far beyond savings.“We knew that we weren’t getting the best pricing offer from our carriers just because nothing was centralized,” he continued. “We knew that if we combined everything from all these business units and paired it with one corporate offering, then it would drive some cost benefit with it.”When the company initially decided to centralize bid procurement, executives researched a number of different methodologies and technologies. In the end, though, Burnett found that Bid$ense was both widespread and well known, and that his carrier partners already knew how to use the application. Burnett also highlighted the data-cleansing process as a major benefit, saying the rigorous process ensures that carriers always return the best price.“It definitely has helped drive savings,” he said. “Any time you go out there and you drive that competitiveness with the carriers and they know they’re in a bid environment, it seems to sharpen their pencils.”Transportation procurement is an integral part of the modern supply chain. With Bid$ense, shippers can develop a strategic implementation plan that saves them time and money, but also helps them create strong relationships with their carrier partners. These carriers appreciate the solution’s data-cleansing process; when carriers receive a complete shipment history and future volume forecast, they don’t have to guess on pricing. Carriers that receive more data from shippers get a complete picture of that shipper’s freight, allowing them to accurately plan instead of simply preparing for the worst-case scenario. Clean data presented through an automated system can lead to both bigger shipment savings and a lasting partnership between carrier and customer.Whether customers are looking to streamline over-the-road transportation bidding by automating the RFP process or create an entirely new, centralized sourcing process, Bid$ense has the analytical horsepower to get the job done.SMC³ 2020 Customer Case Study

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046.jpg

Shippers save money, time with automated transportation bidding tools

If there’s one immutable truth in the world of logistics, it’s this: LTL is an inherently complex form of transportation. Tariffs, rates, DIM weights, transit times — it’s enough to confuse even seasoned logistics professionals. The solution to this knowledge gap has historically been on-the-job training or university supply chain education, but for a variety of reasons there is now a pressing need for third-party, remote LTL training that prepares logistics workers for transportation success. Global Scope Can Overlook Local Intricacies In the past, professionals looking to move into a supply chain career learned about the basics of supply chain from universities. However, many of these college supply chain programs are now global in scope, focusing on worldwide supply chain management instead of the intricacies of specialized domestic transportation. And even these programs, which used to be widespread, are becoming less common. LTL is not an industry of broad-brush strokes; supply chain professionals really need a pointillistic understanding of the logistics of LTL in order to excel in the industry. Accelerating Need for Dedicated LTL Education This lack of specified training put the onus on employers to prepare new hires with the LTL knowledge needed to do their jobs. Dedicated LTL study is a necessity, not a luxury. At the same time, changes in LTL and the broader supply chain world are accelerating. The reliance on e-commerce has ballooned since the start of the pandemic, and last-mile LTL shipments and related e-commerce strains on the supply chain won’t diminish once social distancing abates. That genie isn’t going back into the bottle. So supply chain employers need logistics workers that are fully versed in all aspects of the industry, ready to solve unique shipping and delivery problems based on their extensive supply chain knowledge But why care about LTL? It’s been reported that some shippers in today’s world are no longer concerned with what mode is used to ship their goods. A Multimodal Approach Ensures On-Time Delivery This mode agnosticism means supply chain stakeholders have to be well versed in all modes of transportation. As unforeseen weather events and other disruptions, such as protests, become more common, savvy logistics employees will need to be armed with familiarity of all modes, not just the most popular, to ensure that freight is delivered on time, without damage, and in the most financially expedient way possible. Offerings like SMC³’s LTL online education courses cover a wide range of topics from LTL basics and operations to more advanced concepts like pricing analytics and transportation law. The company also has plans to continually refresh content, adding new expert presenters and taking the feedback of students to make the courses even better as time goes on. Learn more about&nbsp;<a href="https://logisticstrainingcenter.com/smc3-courses/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">SMC³’s LTL Online Education program</a>&nbsp;and view the 2021 hybrid schedule, featuring live industry experts,&nbsp;<a href="https://www.smc3.com/onlinelearning2021/" rel="noreferrer" class="joc_admin__link">here.</a>

SMC3rates_shutterstock_5247046 (1).jpg

Filling the Supply Chain Education Gap with LTL Education Courses

START A FREE TRIAL: Access Journal of Commerce content for 30 days

Free Trial - Offer Box

Free Trial

END OF SUMMER SALE EXTENDED: Use code ESSW30 to save 30% on first year of a Silver or Silver Plus annual subscription!


Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to S/SP - Offer Box

SUBSCRIBE AND SAVE

GET INTO A GROUP SUBSCRIPTION: Arm your team with unlimited Journal of Commerce content

Group Subscriptions - Offer Box

Group Subscriptions

UPGRADE TO GOLD AND SAVE: Use code GTW695 at checkout and save $800 on first year of a Gold subscription!

Upgrade Subscription

END OF SUMMER SALE EXTENDED: Use code ESSW595 at checkout to save $900 on first year of a Gold subscription and 20% on TPM26! 

Upgrade Subscription - S/SP to Gold - Offer Box

END OF SUMMER SALE EXTENDED: Use code ESSW995 to save $500 on an annual Gold subscription and 20% on a TPM26 registration!

Subscribe Now - FT/Anonymous to Gold - Offer Box

A must-attend conference for shippers & logistics providers moving goods inland

Inland Conference - Rectangle Box

Attend Inland25

Monthly publication providing an editorial deep dive into global supply chain news

Journal of Commerce Magazine - Rectangle Box

Journal of Commerce Magazine

A premium access index of savings using domestic intermodal vs. OTR 

ISI Report - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Savings Index

An in-depth analysis of transport trends in the multipurpose and heavy-lift fleet segment

Breakbulk Report - Rectangle Box

Breakbulk Quarterly

An extensive dashboard of charts organized by trade lane, mode, and topic

Gateway - Rectangle Box

Gateway

Customers scoring their intermodal partners to identify the best service providers

Intermodal Service Scorecard - Rectangle Box

Intermodal Service Scorecard

A premium access outlook critical to shippers and transportation providers

QI Report - Rectangle Box

Quarterly Intelligence

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The carrier said that network adjustments that began in April will allow it to eliminate the impact of new US port fees for ships built in China on its shipper customers while maintaining US port coverage.</div>

The carrier said that network adjustments that began in April will allow it to eliminate the impact of new US port fees for ships built in China on its shipper customers while maintaining US port coverage.

<div class="phx-topic">CMA CGM does not plan to charge shippers for the port fees it may face next month for using Chinese-built container ships in service on US trades, nor will it reduce US port coverage on those routes. The container carrier said Wednesday that it has made “fleet and operational adjustments” ahead of the Oct. 14 start date for <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/scaled-back-ustr-port-tariff-to-hit-chinese-carriers-hardest-5987549">the US Trade Representative’s (USTR) new fees on Chinese-built and -operated ships calling US ports</a>. As such, CMA CGM “is not considering implementation of a surcharge on cargo shipped to or from the US at this time,” the company said. The fees, which could amount to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-port-tax-would-scramble-ocean-services-raise-shipper-costs-drewry-5952046">anywhere from $1 million to $3 million for the first US port call</a> and will escalate through 2028, resulted from federal investigations into Chinese dominance of the maritime industry that <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-port-tax-would-scramble-ocean-services-raise-shipper-costs-drewry-5952046">spanned the administrations of presidents Joe Biden and Donald Trump</a>. “During the 180-day grace period following the April 17 USTR announcement, CMA CGM has taken the necessary steps to implement a robust and adaptive contingency plan,” the carrier said. “We currently expect to both maintain our service coverage to all scheduled US ports and minimize any impacts of the upcoming USTR fees.” Over the last six months, 141 different ships operated by CMA CGM called US ports, 22 of which were built in China, according to data from Sea-Web, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&amp;P Global. While some of those ships appear to be extra-loaders or making ad-hoc calls, a few ships that regularly called US ports appear to have been redeployed to serve non-US ports. In particular, CMA CGM removed larger post-Panamax ships that would be subject to higher fees due to their capacity. For example, the CMA CGM Hermes, a 15,000-TEU ship built in Shanghai, has made 44 calls to the US over the last five years, but its last arrival at a US port was on March 31, according to Sea-Web. Since then, the ship has operated on CMA CGM’s Phoenician Express service between Asia and the Middle East. Sister ship CMA CGM Osiris, which last called Oakland in April, is likewise now serving the Middle East. The 15,000-TEU CMA CGM Zephyr, which made 33 port calls to the US over the last five years, is now dispatched to the carrier’s West Africa Express service. <h3>New orders skew toward China </h3>CMA CGM’s active global container fleet has slightly more tonnage built in South Korea, while its order book of new ships has more capacity slated for construction at shipyards in China. According to Sea-Web, CMA CGM currently operates 274 container ships built in South Korea with a combined capacity of 2.18 million TEUs, 253 vessels (1.4 million TEUs) from yards in mainland China, and 125 ships built in Japan, Taiwan or Europe. The carrier has an additional 59 ships on order from China and 29 from South Korea. That sourcing diversification should allow CMA CGM to mitigate the new fees, CFO Ramon Fernandez said during <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cma-cgms-q2-earnings-slide-as-geopolitics-tariffs-hit-shipping-business-6052414">a July interview with the Journal of Commerce</a>, adding that the carrier wants to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cma-cgm-to-invest-20-billion-in-us-shipping-ports-and-logistics-5957748">support the Trump administration’s bid to restore the US shipbuilding industry</a>. “Part of our fleet is being built in in China, part of our fleet is being built in Korea, and so we will be able to manage whatever kind of regulation imposed on us,” Fernandez said. “We are also planning and working on building some vessels in the US, and we are currently discussing with different stakeholders in order to make sure that we can have competitive prices when we consider building ships in the US.” Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto: michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>.Senior Editor Greg Knowler contributed to this article. </div>

CMA CGM does not plan to charge shippers for the port fees it may face next month for using Chinese-built container ships in service on US trades, nor will it reduce US port coverage on those routes. The container carrier said Wednesday that it has made “fleet and operational adjustments” ahead of the Oct. 14 start date for the US Trade Representative’s (USTR) new fees on Chinese-built and -operated ships calling US ports . As such, CMA CGM “is not considering implementation of a surcharge on cargo shipped to or from the US at this time,” the company said. The fees, which could amount to anywhere from $1 million to $3 million for the first US port call and will escalate through 2028, resulted from federal investigations into Chinese dominance of the maritime industry that spanned the administrations of presidents Joe Biden and Donald Trump . “During the 180-day grace period following the April 17 USTR announcement, CMA CGM has taken the necessary steps to implement a robust and adaptive contingency plan,” the carrier said. “We currently expect to both maintain our service coverage to all scheduled US ports and minimize any impacts of the upcoming USTR fees.” Over the last six months, 141 different ships operated by CMA CGM called US ports, 22 of which were built in China, according to data from Sea-Web, a sister company of the Journal of Commerce within S&P Global. While some of those ships appear to be extra-loaders or making ad-hoc calls, a few ships that regularly called US ports appear to have been redeployed to serve non-US ports. In particular, CMA CGM removed larger post-Panamax ships that would be subject to higher fees due to their capacity. For example, the CMA CGM Hermes, a 15,000-TEU ship built in Shanghai, has made 44 calls to the US over the last five years, but its last arrival at a US port was on March 31, according to Sea-Web. Since then, the ship has operated on CMA CGM’s Phoenician Express service between Asia and the Middle East. Sister ship CMA CGM Osiris, which last called Oakland in April, is likewise now serving the Middle East. The 15,000-TEU CMA CGM Zephyr, which made 33 port calls to the US over the last five years, is now dispatched to the carrier’s West Africa Express service. New orders skew toward China CMA CGM’s active global container fleet has slightly more tonnage built in South Korea, while its order book of new ships has more capacity slated for construction at shipyards in China. According to Sea-Web, CMA CGM currently operates 274 container ships built in South Korea with a combined capacity of 2.18 million TEUs, 253 vessels (1.4 million TEUs) from yards in mainland China, and 125 ships built in Japan, Taiwan or Europe. The carrier has an additional 59 ships on order from China and 29 from South Korea. That sourcing diversification should allow CMA CGM to mitigate the new fees, CFO Ramon Fernandez said during a July interview with the Journal of Commerce, adding that the carrier wants to support the Trump administration’s bid to restore the US shipbuilding industry . “Part of our fleet is being built in in China, part of our fleet is being built in Korea, and so we will be able to manage whatever kind of regulation imposed on us,” Fernandez said. “We are also planning and working on building some vessels in the US, and we are currently discussing with different stakeholders in order to make sure that we can have competitive prices when we consider building ships in the US.” Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com . Senior Editor Greg Knowler contributed to this article.

CMA CGM reroutes China-built ships to avoid US port fees

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Suspension of the Pacific South 5 service comes as container lines are announcing more blanked sailings from Asia to the US in an attempt to boost spot rates ahead of China’s Golden Week.</div>

Suspension of the Pacific South 5 service comes as container lines are announcing more blanked sailings from Asia to the US in an attempt to boost spot rates ahead of China’s Golden Week.

<div class="phx-topic">The Premier Alliance said Friday it is suspending its express Pacific South 5 service between eastern China and the US West Coast after only four months amid a drop in demand on the eastbound trans-Pacific. The move is the latest sign that bookings before an annual holiday slowdown in Chinese production are weaker than usual, presenting a challenge to carriers trying to stem a container spot rate bleed. Alliance members Ocean Network Express (ONE), HMM and Yang Ming gave no reason for the change in separate customer advisories, but it is possible the fall in trans-Pacific volumes amid US tariff uncertainty did not justify an express loop. The service provided a transit time of 14 days from Ningbo to Long Beach and 17 days from Qingdao to Long Beach. Instead, the Premier Alliance carriers announced additional port calls on four other trans-Pacific services. These comprise Ningbo on its PS4 service, Qingdao on the PS6 service, Pusan on the Far East Pacific North 2 and Norfolk on the US East Coast 2 services. The PS5 service was launched in June, but the carriers said the last sailing was by the 4,888 TEU NYK Constellation that left Qingdao Sept. 1 and was due to arrive at Ningbo Friday. The suspension comes as container lines are announcing more blanked sailings from Asia to the US as they attempt to boost spot rates ahead of China’s Golden Week, which begins Oct. 1. Carriers are blanking at least five sailings this week compared to two last week and two in the week before, sources confirmed. “Blank sailing activity to the East Coast is moderate now,” James Caradonna, executive vice president of the forwarder Spedag America, told the Journal of Commerce. Several sources said they expect blanking to pick up further as Golden Week approaches. <h3>Carriers try to recoup losses </h3>The next four weeks offer container lines what is likely their last shot this year to claw back at least some of the recent decline in rates. Starting Oct. 1, Chinese factories will close for eight days for Golden Week. The industry is split on whether there is any boost in cargo on the way, with forwarders seeing little signs of late-year traffic gains and a few carriers saying they are hopeful. One carrier executive said retailers should be incentivized to ship what they can this month before the Golden Week holiday. During the second half of August, bookings for Chinese shipments into the US were down nearly 33% from the same time last year, according to data from maritime visibility provider Vizion and data and analytics company Dun &amp; Bradstreet. Even as carriers take more functional capacity out of the market through blank sailings, there is still plenty of slot availability, according to multiple forwarder notices seen by the Journal of Commerce. In September, carriers are blanking almost 15% of capacity into the East and Gulf coasts, according to maritime intelligence provider eeSea. Container spot rates to both coasts have been climbing since Aug. 22, according to various indices, with the Shanghai Shipping Exchange measuring a 33.1% increase on US West Coast routing, to $2,189 per FEU over the past two weeks. Bullet rates quoted for single voyages tend to be $200-$300 less than index rates, and some forwarder quotes for US West Coast routings have been as low as $1,600 per FEU. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="da1b20b1-3e87-4d61-b13f-10e2633dce91"></dynamic-object></div>Several forwarders said they are already seeing some reductions to the latest general rate increase (GRI) implemented Sept. 1. ”We’ve got notifications from carriers already starting to pull the rate down — only like $100 to $200,” said a freight forwarder. “It’s not a huge drop, but we’re only four days in, [and] already seeing some rate reductions.” “Given the lack of volume surge prior to Golden Week, these rate increases are unlikely to stick in full and, at best, will allow the carriers to maintain rate levels,” Sanjay Tejwani, CEO of consulting firm 365 Logistics, told the Journal of Commerce. “This behavior will continue as we get into [the fourth quarter] when the volume decline will be more pronounced [than the third quarter.]” September bookings so far are lower than last year, said Robert Khachatryan, CEO of the forwarder FreightRight Global Logistics. “It doesn’t look good to me. If there is any tightness, it is probably going to be because of the blank sailings,” he said. Overall, another forwarder said, most shippers are not in a hurry to book their shipments, especially with the rate increases. ”The shipper has the power in that sense,” the source said. “At some point they’re [going to realize they] don’t have any inventory. But in the meantime, nobody’s in a hurry.” The US head at a major carrier confirmed blank announcements are encouraging some bookings but noted “bookings are much slower than usual” during the lead-up to Golden Week. <h3>Plentiful capacity </h3>Some container lines are optimistic that demand will rise ahead of Golden Week and that demand for the rest of the year may be stronger than expected. With US inventories low, there is room for restocking even with tariffs, while US durable goods consumption continues to expand, carriers note. “I think what we’re hearing from customers is yes, they frontloaded their volumes, but US consumer demand has probably also exceeded expectations,” Michael Britton, head of North American markets for ocean products at Maersk, told the Journal of Commerce. But Britton acknowledged it was likely that Maersk would have to blank some sailings ahead of Golden Week and could trim services such as the TP9 launched in June if demand weakens more than anticipated. ”[Rates are elevated] because of pre-Golden Week push,” said another carrier source. “We also have had some blanks, so some cargo is being rolled, and our [utilization] is closer to 90%, so it will keep the spot rate at the higher level.” <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="f0d3021d-c84d-4556-9f93-72c0f6230a17"></dynamic-object></div>The source said their elevated utilization had helped support rates, which is why they have not lowered their rates like some other carriers. ”If [utilization] gets to 50% or 60%, then we will start seeing drops,” the source said. “Maybe by the end of the month.” Carriers are already announcing blank sailings for October, which will further constrict capacity. “There will be heavy blanks through mid-October,” the first carrier executive said. “In the final week of October, they’ll be reinstated.” Forwarders say that although most of the alliance carriers this week are attempting to stand firm on the Sept. 1 GRIs, space is plentiful and importers have access to special rates that could begin to erode the posted rates by mid-month. “There is no problem getting space — across the board. Carriers are in a bit of a pickle,” said Jon Monroe, who serves as an advisor to non-vessel-operating common carriers. Contact Laura Robb at <a href="mailto:laura.robb@spglobal.com">laura.robb@spglobal.com</a>. Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. Special Correspondent Keith Wallis contributed to this report. </div>

The Premier Alliance said Friday it is suspending its express Pacific South 5 service between eastern China and the US West Coast after only four months amid a drop in demand on the eastbound trans-Pacific. The move is the latest sign that bookings before an annual holiday slowdown in Chinese production are weaker than usual, presenting a challenge to carriers trying to stem a container spot rate bleed. Alliance members Ocean Network Express (ONE), HMM and Yang Ming gave no reason for the change in separate customer advisories, but it is possible the fall in trans-Pacific volumes amid US tariff uncertainty did not justify an express loop. The service provided a transit time of 14 days from Ningbo to Long Beach and 17 days from Qingdao to Long Beach. Instead, the Premier Alliance carriers announced additional port calls on four other trans-Pacific services. These comprise Ningbo on its PS4 service, Qingdao on the PS6 service, Pusan on the Far East Pacific North 2 and Norfolk on the US East Coast 2 services. The PS5 service was launched in June, but the carriers said the last sailing was by the 4,888 TEU NYK Constellation that left Qingdao Sept. 1 and was due to arrive at Ningbo Friday. The suspension comes as container lines are announcing more blanked sailings from Asia to the US as they attempt to boost spot rates ahead of China’s Golden Week, which begins Oct. 1. Carriers are blanking at least five sailings this week compared to two last week and two in the week before, sources confirmed. “Blank sailing activity to the East Coast is moderate now,” James Caradonna, executive vice president of the forwarder Spedag America, told the Journal of Commerce. Several sources said they expect blanking to pick up further as Golden Week approaches. Carriers try to recoup losses The next four weeks offer container lines what is likely their last shot this year to claw back at least some of the recent decline in rates. Starting Oct. 1, Chinese factories will close for eight days for Golden Week. The industry is split on whether there is any boost in cargo on the way, with forwarders seeing little signs of late-year traffic gains and a few carriers saying they are hopeful. One carrier executive said retailers should be incentivized to ship what they can this month before the Golden Week holiday. During the second half of August, bookings for Chinese shipments into the US were down nearly 33% from the same time last year, according to data from maritime visibility provider Vizion and data and analytics company Dun & Bradstreet. Even as carriers take more functional capacity out of the market through blank sailings, there is still plenty of slot availability, according to multiple forwarder notices seen by the Journal of Commerce. In September, carriers are blanking almost 15% of capacity into the East and Gulf coasts, according to maritime intelligence provider eeSea. Container spot rates to both coasts have been climbing since Aug. 22, according to various indices, with the Shanghai Shipping Exchange measuring a 33.1% increase on US West Coast routing, to $2,189 per FEU over the past two weeks. Bullet rates quoted for single voyages tend to be $200-$300 less than index rates, and some forwarder quotes for US West Coast routings have been as low as $1,600 per FEU. Several forwarders said they are already seeing some reductions to the latest general rate increase (GRI) implemented Sept. 1. ”We’ve got notifications from carriers already starting to pull the rate down — only like $100 to $200,” said a freight forwarder. “It’s not a huge drop, but we’re only four days in, [and] already seeing some rate reductions.” “Given the lack of volume surge prior to Golden Week, these rate increases are unlikely to stick in full and, at best, will allow the carriers to maintain rate levels,” Sanjay Tejwani, CEO of consulting firm 365 Logistics, told the Journal of Commerce. “This behavior will continue as we get into [the fourth quarter] when the volume decline will be more pronounced [than the third quarter.]” September bookings so far are lower than last year, said Robert Khachatryan, CEO of the forwarder FreightRight Global Logistics. “It doesn’t look good to me. If there is any tightness, it is probably going to be because of the blank sailings,” he said. Overall, another forwarder said, most shippers are not in a hurry to book their shipments, especially with the rate increases. ”The shipper has the power in that sense,” the source said. “At some point they’re [going to realize they] don’t have any inventory. But in the meantime, nobody’s in a hurry.” The US head at a major carrier confirmed blank announcements are encouraging some bookings but noted “bookings are much slower than usual” during the lead-up to Golden Week. Plentiful capacity Some container lines are optimistic that demand will rise ahead of Golden Week and that demand for the rest of the year may be stronger than expected. With US inventories low, there is room for restocking even with tariffs, while US durable goods consumption continues to expand, carriers note. “I think what we’re hearing from customers is yes, they frontloaded their volumes, but US consumer demand has probably also exceeded expectations,” Michael Britton, head of North American markets for ocean products at Maersk, told the Journal of Commerce. But Britton acknowledged it was likely that Maersk would have to blank some sailings ahead of Golden Week and could trim services such as the TP9 launched in June if demand weakens more than anticipated. ”[Rates are elevated] because of pre-Golden Week push,” said another carrier source. “We also have had some blanks, so some cargo is being rolled, and our [utilization] is closer to 90%, so it will keep the spot rate at the higher level.” The source said their elevated utilization had helped support rates, which is why they have not lowered their rates like some other carriers. ”If [utilization] gets to 50% or 60%, then we will start seeing drops,” the source said. “Maybe by the end of the month.” Carriers are already announcing blank sailings for October, which will further constrict capacity. “There will be heavy blanks through mid-October,” the first carrier executive said. “In the final week of October, they’ll be reinstated.” Forwarders say that although most of the alliance carriers this week are attempting to stand firm on the Sept. 1 GRIs, space is plentiful and importers have access to special rates that could begin to erode the posted rates by mid-month. “There is no problem getting space — across the board. Carriers are in a bit of a pickle,” said Jon Monroe, who serves as an advisor to non-vessel-operating common carriers. Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com . Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com . Special Correspondent Keith Wallis contributed to this report.

Premier Alliance service halt latest sign of trans-Pacific demand downturn

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">Cracks may be appearing in the LTL pricing wall, as shipment levels drop, but LTL costs remain elevated compared with pandemic-era rates.</div>

Cracks may be appearing in the LTL pricing wall, as shipment levels drop, but LTL costs remain elevated compared with pandemic-era rates.

<div class="phx-topic">Daily shipment volumes fell at some of the largest US less-than-truckload (LTL) carriers in August, as soft demand reportedly brought new pressure to bear on rates and challenged the LTL industry’s pricing discipline. Continued market softness could open more opportunities for cost savings as LTL shippers renew contracts with their carriers or at least hold price increases to a minimum. Even so, LTL carriers continue to expand as they seek new customers and additional volume and <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ltl-carriers-expanding-us-networks-despite-low-freight-demand-6053685">build greater density</a> into their freight networks. And LTL costs <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-ltl-rates-still-rising-after-muted-response-to-shipment-reclassification-6063877">remain elevated</a>, even compared with pandemic-era highs. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="914cdb2d-10c9-442d-8d38-5fc6e7a45eeb"></dynamic-object></div>Financial updates released last week by Old Dominion Freight Line (ODFL), XPO and Saia gave no indication that freight demand rose in August, a month when S&amp;P Global reported a surge in manufacturing output. The S&amp;P Global Purchasing Managers’ Index for US manufacturing rose from 49.8 in July to 53 in August, signaling expansion and inventory growth. However, daily shipment counts at Saia, the sixth-largest US LTL carrier ranked by revenue, dropped 2.2% year over year in August. Shipments at XPO, the fourth-largest carrier, fell 3.4%. Daily volumes at second-largest-ranked ODFL fell 8.2% in August, reflecting “ongoing softness in the domestic economy,” ODFL said. ABF Freight System, a subsidiary of ArcBest, bucked the trend, increasing its shipment count 5% year over year in August and 1% from July, the company said Monday. <h3>Working the core </h3>Despite continued softness in manufacturing and housing, ABF said it succeeded in adding new core LTL business in August. “The company remains focused on onboarding new business while maintaining consistent reliability,” ArcBest said in a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. Total revenue per hundredweight — a measure of pricing, surcharges and costs often called yield — was flat at ABF in August. ODFL said its revenue per day fell 4.8% from a year earlier in August. However, revenue per hundredweight, excluding fuel surcharges, rose 4.5%. That’s a sign that pricing, excluding surcharges, continued to rise at ODFL. Since the Great Recession ended in 2009, LTL carriers have become known for their pricing “discipline,” and for placing more emphasis on profitability than market share. Some sources say that discipline is showing cracks as lower volume raises the cost of operating LTL networks and hammers trucking companies’ bottom lines. Some LTL carriers are becoming “super aggressive,” said Mike Regan, chief of relationship development at TranzAct Technologies, a freight audit, payment and procurement firm. “I had the CEO of an LTL company tell me, ‘We’re going to price to get our trucks full, then we’ll go back to the (rates) we want,’” Regan said. Other sources, including a major logistics provider, said they are seeing more targeted price cuts in lanes and markets where LTL carriers want freight. Costing models and analytics — technology many LTL providers didn’t have 10 years ago — are helping carriers determine where they can cut without endangering profits and margins. <h3>Adding space, chasing freight </h3>At the same time, LTL companies continue to expand their networks. Ohio-based Midwestern regional LTL provider Dayton Freight Lines on Monday said it is opening a terminal in Bedford, Pa., to provide more direct LTL coverage linking the Midwest with Pennsylvania and Maryland. Dayton partners with A. Duie Pyle in the region, and Pyle has also been expanding in Ohio. The US producer price index (PPI) for long-distance LTL trucking has shown no signs of slowing through July, the last month for which data was available. The PPI, which represents all-inclusive LTL “selling prices” paid by shippers, rose 7.3% year over year in July to 265.4, a reading 2.6% higher than its previous peak in 2022. LTL carriers are still winning increases of 2% to 3% in contract renewals or extensions, according to Satish Jindel, president of research firm SJ Consulting Group. “They’re all looking for more business,” Jindel said. Discounting “would just put pressure on their margins. It would begin to look like 2009 again,” — a time when heavy discounts during a recession led to losses for several LTL carriers. Contact William B. Cassidy at <a href="mailto:bill.cassidy@spglobal.com">bill.cassidy@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

Daily shipment volumes fell at some of the largest US less-than-truckload (LTL) carriers in August, as soft demand reportedly brought new pressure to bear on rates and challenged the LTL industry’s pricing discipline. Continued market softness could open more opportunities for cost savings as LTL shippers renew contracts with their carriers or at least hold price increases to a minimum. Even so, LTL carriers continue to expand as they seek new customers and additional volume and build greater density into their freight networks. And LTL costs remain elevated , even compared with pandemic-era highs. Financial updates released last week by Old Dominion Freight Line (ODFL), XPO and Saia gave no indication that freight demand rose in August, a month when S&P Global reported a surge in manufacturing output. The S&P Global Purchasing Managers’ Index for US manufacturing rose from 49.8 in July to 53 in August, signaling expansion and inventory growth. However, daily shipment counts at Saia, the sixth-largest US LTL carrier ranked by revenue, dropped 2.2% year over year in August. Shipments at XPO, the fourth-largest carrier, fell 3.4%. Daily volumes at second-largest-ranked ODFL fell 8.2% in August, reflecting “ongoing softness in the domestic economy,” ODFL said. ABF Freight System, a subsidiary of ArcBest, bucked the trend, increasing its shipment count 5% year over year in August and 1% from July, the company said Monday. Working the core Despite continued softness in manufacturing and housing, ABF said it succeeded in adding new core LTL business in August. “The company remains focused on onboarding new business while maintaining consistent reliability,” ArcBest said in a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. Total revenue per hundredweight — a measure of pricing, surcharges and costs often called yield — was flat at ABF in August. ODFL said its revenue per day fell 4.8% from a year earlier in August. However, revenue per hundredweight, excluding fuel surcharges, rose 4.5%. That’s a sign that pricing, excluding surcharges, continued to rise at ODFL. Since the Great Recession ended in 2009, LTL carriers have become known for their pricing “discipline,” and for placing more emphasis on profitability than market share. Some sources say that discipline is showing cracks as lower volume raises the cost of operating LTL networks and hammers trucking companies’ bottom lines. Some LTL carriers are becoming “super aggressive,” said Mike Regan, chief of relationship development at TranzAct Technologies, a freight audit, payment and procurement firm. “I had the CEO of an LTL company tell me, ‘We’re going to price to get our trucks full, then we’ll go back to the (rates) we want,’” Regan said. Other sources, including a major logistics provider, said they are seeing more targeted price cuts in lanes and markets where LTL carriers want freight. Costing models and analytics — technology many LTL providers didn’t have 10 years ago — are helping carriers determine where they can cut without endangering profits and margins. Adding space, chasing freight At the same time, LTL companies continue to expand their networks. Ohio-based Midwestern regional LTL provider Dayton Freight Lines on Monday said it is opening a terminal in Bedford, Pa., to provide more direct LTL coverage linking the Midwest with Pennsylvania and Maryland. Dayton partners with A. Duie Pyle in the region, and Pyle has also been expanding in Ohio. The US producer price index (PPI) for long-distance LTL trucking has shown no signs of slowing through July, the last month for which data was available. The PPI, which represents all-inclusive LTL “selling prices” paid by shippers, rose 7.3% year over year in July to 265.4, a reading 2.6% higher than its previous peak in 2022. LTL carriers are still winning increases of 2% to 3% in contract renewals or extensions, according to Satish Jindel, president of research firm SJ Consulting Group. “They’re all looking for more business,” Jindel said. Discounting “would just put pressure on their margins. It would begin to look like 2009 again,” — a time when heavy discounts during a recession led to losses for several LTL carriers. Contact William B. Cassidy at bill.cassidy@spglobal.com .

Falling US LTL volumes putting pressure on margins, rates

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">US retailers increased September and October import volume expectations significantly, but it will not be enough to meet 2024 levels. </div>

US retailers increased September and October import volume expectations significantly, but it will not be enough to meet 2024 levels.

<div class="phx-topic">US retailers on Tuesday said they are bringing in more imports than they projected a month ago but are still on track to ship less in the fourth quarter than they did in the same period last year. According to the latest Global Port Tracker (GPT) from Hackett Associates on behalf of the National Retail Federation (NRF), inbound container volumes will fall 6.8% year over year in September, a sharp upward revision from the 19.4% drop <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/us-retailers-project-big-year-over-year-import-declines-to-close-out-2025-6060323">forecast a month ago</a>. That upward revision will equate to about 300,000 TEUs of additional imports compared with the previous projection. The improved-but-still-<a href="https://www.joc.com/article/ocean-carrier-profit-margins-earnings-outlook-for-2025-trimmed-further-6074809">downbeat outlook</a> for import volumes for the rest of the year comes after US importers <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/premier-alliance-service-halt-latest-sign-of-trans-pacific-demand-downturn-6076326">frontloaded imports for months</a> to avoid higher US tariffs and as retail sales slow. The year-over-year declines are also steeper because cargo owners front-loaded cargo last fall to avoid US East and Gulf Coast labor strikes. “Tariffs have had a significant impact on trade,” Hackett Associates founder Ben Hackett said in the latest GPT. “The trade outlook for the final months of the year is not optimistic.” Despite slower job growth and higher consumer inflation, US retail sales remain solid. US retail sales in July and June rose 0.5% year over year thanks in part to people buying vehicles to avoid higher prices resulting from new steel tariffs. US importers plan to bring about 290,000 TEUs less cargo in October, 420,000 TEUs less in November and 430,000 TEUs less in December than in the same months in 2024. Actual US laden container imports from Asia spiked 25.7% year over year in July as tariffs pushed importers to move peak season and holiday goods earlier than usual, according to PIERS, a Journal of Commerce sister product within S&amp;P Global. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="70970c23-b1c8-4e32-a007-d4c69ada36f8"></dynamic-object></div>“Retailers have stocked up as much as they can ahead of tariff increases,” Jonathan Gold, vice president for supply chain and customs policy at the NRF, said in the latest GPT report. “But the uncertainty of US trade policy is making it impossible to make the long-term plans that are critical to future business success.” US retailers are keeping just enough stock in hand, holding about 1.3 months of inventory from January through June, according to the latest data from the US Census Bureau. <div class="wrapper-narrow"><dynamic-object type="jocchartid" resource-id="d1f4c911-fe90-4716-8dd0-46a2d22dbd8b"></dynamic-object></div>Importers “are very cautious about holding on to inventory because of the tariffs,” a consultant who formerly held top logistics positions at two national retailers told the Journal of Commerce. “In certain sectors, demand is soft,” the consultant added. In addition, a number of businesses are reducing the inventory they carry because the tariff situation is so chaotic, a forwarder told the Journal of Commerce. The less inventory they carry, the less potential there is to be impacted by the tariff volatility, the forwarder said. Because Lunar New Year falls on Feb. 17 in 2026, rather than in January, there is less of an impetus for retailers to begin restocking in December. Even so, US retailers plan to import 19.1% less in January 2026 than a year prior, according to the GPT report. US retail sales in November and December will rise 4% year over year, compared to a 10-year compound annual growth rate of 5.2%, according to consultancy Bain &amp; Co. Contact Laura Robb at <a href="mailto:Laura.Robb@spglobal.com">laura.robb@spglobal.com</a>.  Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at <a href="mailto:bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com">bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com</a>. </div>

US retailers on Tuesday said they are bringing in more imports than they projected a month ago but are still on track to ship less in the fourth quarter than they did in the same period last year. According to the latest Global Port Tracker (GPT) from Hackett Associates on behalf of the National Retail Federation (NRF), inbound container volumes will fall 6.8% year over year in September, a sharp upward revision from the 19.4% drop forecast a month ago . That upward revision will equate to about 300,000 TEUs of additional imports compared with the previous projection. The improved-but-still- downbeat outlook for import volumes for the rest of the year comes after US importers frontloaded imports for months to avoid higher US tariffs and as retail sales slow. The year-over-year declines are also steeper because cargo owners front-loaded cargo last fall to avoid US East and Gulf Coast labor strikes. “Tariffs have had a significant impact on trade,” Hackett Associates founder Ben Hackett said in the latest GPT. “The trade outlook for the final months of the year is not optimistic.” Despite slower job growth and higher consumer inflation, US retail sales remain solid. US retail sales in July and June rose 0.5% year over year thanks in part to people buying vehicles to avoid higher prices resulting from new steel tariffs. US importers plan to bring about 290,000 TEUs less cargo in October, 420,000 TEUs less in November and 430,000 TEUs less in December than in the same months in 2024. Actual US laden container imports from Asia spiked 25.7% year over year in July as tariffs pushed importers to move peak season and holiday goods earlier than usual, according to PIERS, a Journal of Commerce sister product within S&P Global. “Retailers have stocked up as much as they can ahead of tariff increases,” Jonathan Gold, vice president for supply chain and customs policy at the NRF, said in the latest GPT report. “But the uncertainty of US trade policy is making it impossible to make the long-term plans that are critical to future business success.” US retailers are keeping just enough stock in hand, holding about 1.3 months of inventory from January through June, according to the latest data from the US Census Bureau. Importers “are very cautious about holding on to inventory because of the tariffs,” a consultant who formerly held top logistics positions at two national retailers told the Journal of Commerce. “In certain sectors, demand is soft,” the consultant added. In addition, a number of businesses are reducing the inventory they carry because the tariff situation is so chaotic, a forwarder told the Journal of Commerce. The less inventory they carry, the less potential there is to be impacted by the tariff volatility, the forwarder said. Because Lunar New Year falls on Feb. 17 in 2026, rather than in January, there is less of an impetus for retailers to begin restocking in December. Even so, US retailers plan to import 19.1% less in January 2026 than a year prior, according to the GPT report. US retail sales in November and December will rise 4% year over year, compared to a 10-year compound annual growth rate of 5.2%, according to consultancy Bain & Co. Contact Laura Robb at laura.robb@spglobal.com .  Contact Bill Mongelluzzo at bill.mongelluzzo@spglobal.com .

US retailers upgrade import forecast but still expect Q4 decline

<div class="phx-topic abstract-wrapper">The investment bank said non-Chinese carriers will largely avoid looming and escalating port fees, but Cosco and OOCL will be on the hook unless they adjust networks.</div>

The investment bank said non-Chinese carriers will largely avoid looming and escalating port fees, but Cosco and OOCL will be on the hook unless they adjust networks.

<div class="phx-topic">Most container lines will avoid paying new US fees on port calls next month after switching out any Chinese-built ships from their services, while Cosco Shipping and subsidiary OOCL face a $2 billion hit in the first year, unless they adjust their networks, according to a new report from investment bank HSBC.Barring a trade deal with China or last-minute delays by the Trump administration, the US Trade Representative (USTR) <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/revised-china-tonnage-tax-less-disruptive-still-costly-6005402">will begin collecting fees on Chinese-built and -operated ships</a> that call US ports from Oct. 14. The administration hasn’t given any indications of postponing or easing the tariffs, a maritime attorney with ties to the White House who asked not to be identified told the Journal of Commerce, noting that US Customs and Border Protection has already been instructed to collect the fees.The fees on Chinese-built ships start at the higher of $18 per net ton of vessel capacity or $120 per container, while ships operated by carriers based in China face a fee of $50 per net ton. Both sets of fees escalate over the next four years as part of the Trump administration’s attempt to <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/trumps-expansionist-worldview-puts-us-maritime-interests-in-spotlight-5946935">boost US shipbuilding</a> at the expense of China’s industry. For Cosco and OOCL, which handle <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/coscooocl-saw-big-gains-in-us-imports-from-asia-in-early-2025-6026695">the largest share of containerized US imports from Asia</a>, the tariffs equate roughly to $600 per FEU, according to the HSBC report.However, the industrywide impact for container shipping may be minimal, the HSBC report suggests, as just 15% of US port calls in 2024 were made by vessels built in China. Chinese-built ships account for just under 30% of the global container vessel fleet, with most ships built in Japan or South Korea.<h3>Rotating China-built ships out </h3>In the lead-up to the Oct. 14 enforcement deadline, carriers have been making moves to avoid any US calls by Chinese-built ships. The Premier Alliance, for example, <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/container-lines-begin-shifting-china-built-ships-out-of-us-loops-6069162">reconfigured a round-the-world service</a> to use Chinese ships on the Asia-Mediterranean leg and non-Chinese ships on the trans-Pacific leg. HSBC said the move will allow Premier Alliance partner Ocean Network Express to remove 10 Chinese-built ships from US service.By contrast, Maersk doesn’t expect any of its services will be affected by the new fees, nor will shippers have any added costs because of the fees, Michael Britton, North American head of ocean products, said during a Journal of Commerce webinar last week. Maersk and its Gemini Cooperation partner Hapag-Lloyd primarily use South Korean ships in their trans-Pacific services, the HBSC report noted. ”The fleet has been deployed in such a way that we’re fully compliant with the rule, and we won’t have any costs associated with this,” Britton said. “We’ve also made it very clear: we have no intention of introducing any surcharge for this.”Although it said the USTR fees will be “negligible for non-Chinese lines,” HSBC estimated that Cosco could face $1.5 billion in port fees in 2026, equivalent to about $600 per US-bound container. The fee represents about 5% of the carrier’s expected revenue during the period, the report said. OOCL could face a $654 million hit, which would account for about 7% of estimated revenue during 2026, HSBC said, adding that the cost of the port fees could result in a two-thirds decline in operating earnings for 2026. Cosco in April said the USTR fees <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/cosco-slams-us-port-fees-as-other-carriers-reckon-with-potential-costs-5989606">would distort the shipping market</a>, while OOCL on Aug. 21 told investors that <a href="https://www.joc.com/article/tariff-linked-trade-pattern-shifts-could-offset-impact-of-us-port-fees-ooil-6066902">changing trade patterns away from the US</a> would mitigate the impact. <h3>Global capacity ripples </h3>Even though the impact of the USTR fees may be limited to certain carriers, they could still affect shipping more broadly, HSBC said. The current supply glut could extend further in the future if carriers decide to keep older non-Chinese vessels in operation longer than they would have otherwise. On the other hand, carriers will also have less flexibility to rotate in new ships or add new capacity to US trade lanes if the only available vessels were built in China.Service changes may be most critical for the Ocean Alliance, which comprises Cosco, OOCL, CMA CGM and Evergreen Marine. HSBC said CMA CGM and/or Evergreen may have to provide more of the vessels operating on the alliance’s trans-Pacific services to avoid exposure to the port fees. Cosco and OOCL, meanwhile, could provide more of the tonnage going into the Ocean Alliance’s non-US trade lanes, or the group could offer transshipment options through Mexico and Canada. “The network realignment by Chinese and non-Chinese carriers could temporarily reduce services and tighten capacity,” HSBC said.Contact Michael Angell at <a href="mailto:michael.angell@spglobal.com">michael.angell@spglobal.com</a>.</div>

Most container lines will avoid paying new US fees on port calls next month after switching out any Chinese-built ships from their services, while Cosco Shipping and subsidiary OOCL face a $2 billion hit in the first year, unless they adjust their networks, according to a new report from investment bank HSBC. Barring a trade deal with China or last-minute delays by the Trump administration, the US Trade Representative (USTR) will begin collecting fees on Chinese-built and -operated ships that call US ports from Oct. 14. The administration hasn’t given any indications of postponing or easing the tariffs, a maritime attorney with ties to the White House who asked not to be identified told the Journal of Commerce, noting that US Customs and Border Protection has already been instructed to collect the fees. The fees on Chinese-built ships start at the higher of $18 per net ton of vessel capacity or $120 per container, while ships operated by carriers based in China face a fee of $50 per net ton. Both sets of fees escalate over the next four years as part of the Trump administration’s attempt to boost US shipbuilding at the expense of China’s industry. For Cosco and OOCL, which handle the largest share of containerized US imports from Asia , the tariffs equate roughly to $600 per FEU, according to the HSBC report. However, the industrywide impact for container shipping may be minimal, the HSBC report suggests, as just 15% of US port calls in 2024 were made by vessels built in China. Chinese-built ships account for just under 30% of the global container vessel fleet, with most ships built in Japan or South Korea. Rotating China-built ships out In the lead-up to the Oct. 14 enforcement deadline, carriers have been making moves to avoid any US calls by Chinese-built ships. The Premier Alliance, for example, reconfigured a round-the-world service to use Chinese ships on the Asia-Mediterranean leg and non-Chinese ships on the trans-Pacific leg. HSBC said the move will allow Premier Alliance partner Ocean Network Express to remove 10 Chinese-built ships from US service. By contrast, Maersk doesn’t expect any of its services will be affected by the new fees, nor will shippers have any added costs because of the fees, Michael Britton, North American head of ocean products, said during a Journal of Commerce webinar last week. Maersk and its Gemini Cooperation partner Hapag-Lloyd primarily use South Korean ships in their trans-Pacific services, the HBSC report noted. ”The fleet has been deployed in such a way that we’re fully compliant with the rule, and we won’t have any costs associated with this,” Britton said. “We’ve also made it very clear: we have no intention of introducing any surcharge for this.” Although it said the USTR fees will be “negligible for non-Chinese lines,” HSBC estimated that Cosco could face $1.5 billion in port fees in 2026, equivalent to about $600 per US-bound container. The fee represents about 5% of the carrier’s expected revenue during the period, the report said. OOCL could face a $654 million hit, which would account for about 7% of estimated revenue during 2026, HSBC said, adding that the cost of the port fees could result in a two-thirds decline in operating earnings for 2026. Cosco in April said the USTR fees would distort the shipping market , while OOCL on Aug. 21 told investors that changing trade patterns away from the US would mitigate the impact. Global capacity ripples Even though the impact of the USTR fees may be limited to certain carriers, they could still affect shipping more broadly, HSBC said. The current supply glut could extend further in the future if carriers decide to keep older non-Chinese vessels in operation longer than they would have otherwise. On the other hand, carriers will also have less flexibility to rotate in new ships or add new capacity to US trade lanes if the only available vessels were built in China. Service changes may be most critical for the Ocean Alliance, which comprises Cosco, OOCL, CMA CGM and Evergreen Marine. HSBC said CMA CGM and/or Evergreen may have to provide more of the vessels operating on the alliance’s trans-Pacific services to avoid exposure to the port fees. Cosco and OOCL, meanwhile, could provide more of the tonnage going into the Ocean Alliance’s non-US trade lanes, or the group could offer transshipment options through Mexico and Canada. “The network realignment by Chinese and non-Chinese carriers could temporarily reduce services and tighten capacity,” HSBC said. Contact Michael Angell at michael.angell@spglobal.com .

Multipurpose vessel supply-demand balance on knife edge

Featured Gateway Chart

Essential Reads

Knight-Swift says it backs Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern deal

Ocean market in trans-Pacific arrives at spot pricing tipping point

DP World aims to run Carney-backed Montreal terminal

Recent Commentary

Ocean carriers are not helpless when it comes to managing capacity

Michigan inland port offers new option for Great Lakes containerized freight

Top 5 Most Read Stories